Hitler and Stalin weren't atheists! - Evidences
Offline |
Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin weren't atheists - Evidences
Last edition: 2007-10-11 / Believers often accuse atheists, that Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were atheists... they both were not! Here I collected some evidences, but need some grammar check by Americans or British. I think, this text (especially about Stalin) can be useful in debates. Feel free to use this information anywhere and anyhow you want. Please inform me if you will notice misrepresentation of facts. Vaidotas Jocys ([email protected]) http://vjocys.blogspot.com/
DICTATORS "ATHEISTS"
Adolf Hitler (1889 – 1945) and The Order of The Jesuits
Believers like to lie, that Adolf Hitler was an atheist and killing Jews has nothing to do with religion. The truth is that Adolf Hitler was a Roman Catholic. With his speeches and actions he let to understand not once, that he believes in God, pursues God’s will-plan and even is protected by God. Such thought was obsessed Hitler after many unsuccessful attempts to kill him. And now few quotes form "atheist" Adolf Hitler’s personal book "My Struggle" ("Mein Kampf"):
Volume One: A Reckoning (Erster Band: Eine Abrechnung)
2. Years of Study and Suffering in Vienna: "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord."
2. Kapitel - Wiener Lehr und Leidensjahre: "So glaube ich heute im Sinne des allmächtigen Schöpfers zu handeln: Indem ich mich des Juden erwehre, kämpfe ich für das Werk des Herrn."
6. War Propaganda: "Certainly we don't have to discuss these matters with the Jews, the most modern inventors of this cultural perfume. Their whole existence is an embodied protest against the aesthetics of the Lord's image."
6. Kapitel - Kriegspropaganda: "Mit den Juden, als den modernen Erfindern dieses Kulturparfüms, braucht man sich aber darüber wahrhaftig nicht zu unterhalten. Ihr ganzes Dasein ist der fleisch-gewordene Protest gegen die Ästhetik des Ebenbildes des Herrn."
8. The Beginning of My Political Activity: "What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race and our people, the sustenance of our children and the purity of our blood, the freedom and independence of the fatherland, so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the Creator of the universe."
8. Kapitel - Beginn meiner politischen Tätigkeit: "Für was wir zu kämpfen haben, ist die Sicherung des Bestehens und der Vermeh-rung unserer Rasse und unseres Volkes, die Ernährung seiner Kinder und Reinhal-tung des Blutes, die Freiheit und Unab-hängigkeit des Vaterlandes, auf daß unser Volk zur Erfüllung der auch ihm vom Schöpfer des Universums zugewiesenen Mission heranzureifen vermag."
Volume Two: The National Socialist Movement (Zweiter Band: Die nationalsozialistische Bewegung)
1. Philosophy and Party: "Whoever would dare to raise a profane hand against that highest image of God among His creatures would sin against the bountiful Creator of this marvel and would collaborate in the expulsion from Paradise."
1. Kapitel - Weltanschauung und Partei: "Wer die Hand an das höchste Ebenbild des Herrn zu legen wagt, frevelt am gütigen Schöpfer dieses Wunders und hilft mit an der Vertreibung aus dem Paradies."
10. Federalism as a Mask: As far as regards that kind of 'patriotic' warrior, on behalf of the National Socialist Movement and therefore of the German people I pray with all my heart: "Lord, preserve us from such friends, and then we can easily deal with our enemies."
10. Kapitel - Der Föderalismus als Maske: "Ich kann, was diese Art von "völkischen" Kämp-fern betrifft, der nationalsozialistischen Bewegung und da-mit auch dem deutschen Volke aus aufrichtigstem Herzen nur wünschen: "Herr, bewahre sie vor solchen Freunden, auch sie wird mit ihren Feinden dann schon fertig werden."
13. German Alliance Policy after the War: "Almighty God, bless our arms when the hour comes. Be just, as Thou hast always been just. Judge now if we deserve our freedom. Lord, bless our struggle."
13. Kapitel - Deutsche Bündnispolitik nach dem Kriege: "Allmäch-tiger Gott, segne dereinst unsere Waffen; sei so gerecht, wie du es immer warst; ur-teile jetzt, ob wir die Freiheit nun verdie-nen; Herr, segne unseren Kampf!"
14. Eastern Orientation or Eastern Policy: "And this action is the only one which, before God and our German posterity, would make any sacrifice of blood seems justified."
14. Kapitel - Ostorientierung oder Ostpolitik: "Und diese Aktion ist die einzige, die vor Gott und unserer deutschen Nachwelt einen Bluteinsatz gerecht-fertigt erscheinen läßt."
Adolf Hitler saw atheism as a danger:
Adolf Hitler said in 1941-10-14: "Educated man always stands in Reverence facing Creation; he can’t unriddle it’s sensible Greatness; but Uneducated man is in Danger to proceed to Atheism, which means he will be Brutish." (Adolf Hitler: Monologues from the Führer's Headquarter, page 41, published by Orbis Verlag in 2000)
Adolf Hitler sagte am 14. Oktober 1941: "Der gebildete Mensch steht immer in Ehrfurcht vor der Schöpfung, die er nicht enträtseln kann, deren Größe er aber empfindet; der Ungebildete hingegen ist in Gefahr, zum Atheismus, das ist zum Vertiert sein, überzuspringen." (Adolf Hitler: Monologe aus dem Führerhauptquartier, seite 41, Orbis Verlag, 2000)
"We don't want to educate anyone in atheism." - Adolf Hitler (Table-Talk p. 6)
"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.” (1941, Said by Hitler to General Gerhart Engel) - Adolf Hitler, from John Toland [Pulitzer Prize winner], Adolf Hitler, New York: Anchor Publishing, 1992
"I learned much from the Order of the Jesuits…until now there has never been anything more grandiose on the earth than the hierarchical organization of the Catholic Church. I transferred much of this organization into my own party." - Hermann Rauschning, Hitler Said To Me (1939), 266-267.
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Saviour as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded 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 for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, 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 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." -Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)
Hitler saw himself as a reformer of Christianity, not as fighter against Christianity. He newer renounced Christ and his Christianity even in Table Talk. He fought against Christians, who, as he thought, corrupted Christianity. He saw himself as Jesus and Martin Luther.
"Luther had the merit of rising against the Pope and the organisation of the Church. It was the first of the great revolutions. And thanks to his translation of the Bible, Luther replaced our dialects by the great German language!" (Hitler / Table-Talk p. 9)
"The decisive falsification of Jesus's doctrine was the work of St. Paul. He gave himself to this work with subtlety and for purposes of personal exploitation. For the Galiean's object was to liberate His country from Jewish oppression. He set Himself against Jewish capitalism, and that's why the Jews liquidated Him." (Hitler / Table-Talk, p. 76)
"Christ was an Aryan, and St. Paul used his doctrine to mobilise the criminal underworld and thus organise a proto-Bolshevism." (Hitler / Table-Talk, p. 143)
Just because Hitler tried to create his own version of Christianity and prove, that Jesus was not a Jew, and therefore argued with other Christians - that does not make him unbeliever or anti-Christian. Christians always struggle between each other for "true" Christianity even till blood and accuse each other that their opponents are not "true" Christians – you do the same thing with Hitler. Hitler didn’t reject Christianity as such. He just criticized it’s organized version and therefore later (1936-1938) switched from "Official Christianity" branch to "The Order of Jesuits" branch.
If Protestant fights against Catholic version of Christianity, that doesn’t mean that Protestant is not a Christian and doesn’t belong to Christianity. Some people are believers with their personalized-modified understanding of religion or God. And they fight against other religions or organized their forms, or they fight even against organized their own religion. For example: they can think that it is corrupted and perverted, greedy or there is no need in organized religion - God must be private thing, etc..
There are no identical standard of Christianity, just each group declare themselves as "standard". Every group and every person is slightly different and has his own modifications of God and how to worship Him. Differences appear from different/subjective experience and knowledge in life and secondary – because of personal modifications. And these modifications always come from a wish to satisfy personal needs with less expense and more easily to pass to Heaven. So if "true" Christianity for you, Mormon or Pope is ONE thing, for Hitler, Mother Teresa, Orthodox or some guy in India it will be OTHER thing. Therefore Christians will always fight for "true" Christianity between each other, as personal needs between people often come in conflict and nobody wants to see himself as fallible. But this doesn't make them non-Christians. Everybody wants to take more than to give. Hitler modified Christianity to make it more profitable for himself (as ALL Christians do without exception – just not all want to admit this for themselves) and honestly believed, that these modifications leads to "true" Christianity. He believed that old type organized Christianity is corrupted. People, who made profit form Hitler’s changes, honestly admitted that these changes led TO more "true" Christianity. Who lost from these changes, started to claim that they led away FROM "true" Christianity. Today‘s Christians are not the ones, who made profit from Hitler’s ideas and changes, …and entirely just because he brought shame on Christianity as a Christian. So of course, today’s Christians opposing Hitler’s changes on Christianity and identify them as factors which distanced Christianity from "true". Therefore they are opposing Hitler’s own identification as "true" Christian, because he does not match today’s Christians subjective conception of what is "true" Christian. Christians just want to wash their hands now and exclude from Christianity members who put them in uncomfortable position.
Hitler believed in Christian God, in Christ, went to Christian church and prayed. He has all main Christianity bases. He was the same candy of sh*, just in different wrapping. What about killing? There is one True Christian besides Hitler – God, who lied, cheated, killed, robbed and was a paedophile. So everyone, who commits all these sins, can be Christian too (unless God is an Atheist).
"Atheist" Hitler’s "atheistic" army wore their "atheism" propagating sign on their military uniforms, like buckles "God With Us" ("Gott mit uns"). Some ideas how to persecute and exterminate Jews Hitler just copied from previous Popes. For example to wear special signs and ghettoize Jews was "brilliant" idea of Pope, made-up and described in 1555 year in document "Cum nimis absurdum". It is not big secret that present Pope Joseph Ratzinger was member of "Hitler’s-Youth" ("Hitler-Jugend"). Fascism with Mussolini borned and developed in Italy too. People, who know geography well, can tell easily where Vatican is
Joseph Stalin (1878 – 1953) and Orthodox Christian Church of Russia
Not only Adolf Hitler was a believer. Josef Stalin - The bloodiest communist regime dictator was not an ATHEIST(!), but RELIGIOUS COMMUNIST. He was believer. Stalin born in 1878, received more power and started his mass murder journey through corpses in 1922 and died in 1953.
1. Stalin grow-up in religious family and it was planed that he will become a priest. Therefore Stalin received religious education in Gori Church‘s School (from 1888-09-... to 1894-06-...) and Tbilisi Priest‘s Seminary (from 1894-09-01 to 1899-07-29) which he didn’t accomplished because he entered Revolution movement. Likely, those ideas about defending poor people and that rich people will go to hell or at least for them will be hard to go to (communistic) heaven... no doubt that Stalin collected such ideas from his religious education. In the Bible itself there are explanations that it will be hard to go to Heaven for rich people and they are oppressors of the poor. "All capital/property is evil and rich people must gift their property to poor" – was not too far from The Bible and teachings of Christ as Christians wants to present now. For example:
Bible:NT:Mat:19:23-24 And Jesus said to his disciples, "Truly, I say to you, it will be hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven. Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God."
Bible:NT:Ja:2:5-6 "Listen, my beloved brethren. Has not God chosen those who are poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which he has promised to those who love him? But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you, is it not they who drag you into court?"
Bible:NT:Ja:5:1 "Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you."
Bible shows that if you want to be real believer, you must resign your possessions to poor and have common property, like communists and planned:
Bible:NT:Lu:12:33 "Sell your possessions, and give alms; provide yourselves with purses that do not grow old, with a treasure in the heavens that does not fail, where no thief approaches and no moth destroys."
Bible:NT:Mar:10:21-22 And Jesus looking upon him loved him, and said to him, "You lack one thing; go, sell what you have, and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me." At that saying his countenance fell, and he went away sorrowful; for he had great possessions.
Bible:NT:Ac:2:44-45 And all who believed were together and had all things in common; and they sold their possessions and goods and distributed them to all, as any had need.
Sometimes people think that communism (latin: commun=to share / collective property – no private property) was atheistic idea. But they forgot, how property was and is managed in Church and monasteries, where is no private property – this is pure communism in all its glory. It seems that Church and monasteries adopted and realized "atheistic" ideas of shared property thousands of years before revolution in Russia even started. And when you read the Bible, you can see that Christ followers and his band lived as pure atheists too.
2. Stalin wrote poems in Georgian language. They are so good that were being published in local magazines. Few fragments sounds so (translation from Georgian to Russian language by L.Kotiukov (Л. Котюков), Newspaper "Duel" N10(101)1999-03-09. "Poet Josef Dzhugashvili" (Газета "Дуель", "Поет Иосиф Джугашвили" N 10(101) 1999-03-09. Б.М. Гунько)):
(...) In his burden and song like the beam of the Sun, lived great truth – Divine dream.
(...) But people who forgot God, with darkness in their hearts, instead of wine served poison to him in the cup.
And told to him: "Damn you! Drink this cup to the bottom!... And your song is alien for us, and we don’t need your truth!"
В напеве его и в песне, Как солнечный луч чиста, Жила великая правда - Божественная мечта.
Но люди, забывшие Бога, Хранящие в сердце тьму, Вместо вина отраву Налили в чашу ему.
Сказали ему: "Будь проклят! Чашу испей до дна!... И песня твоя чужда нам, И правда твоя не нужна!"
3. Stalin’s daughter Svetlana Alliluyeva Stalin said (documentary "Mysteries of the Century: Kremlin Kids" ("Тайны века" - "Дети Кремля") 2003-03-19, 1 Channel 1 Russia), how Stalin told her that Christ existed.
Journalist: It is interesting, that from all Kremlin’ residents, maybe, just Stalin believed in God...
S.Alliluyeva: In fathers library, between other books, were few tomes of "Christ". It was history of Christ written by vox populist Morozov. I said to my father: "But Christ didn’t exist!" and he answered "Oh no, Christ, surely existed."
Ведущий: Интересно, что из обитателей Кремля, наверное, только Сталин верил в Бога...
С.Аллилуева: У отца среди книг в библиотеке стояли несколько томов "Христос". Это история Христа, написанная народовольцем Морозовым. Я сказала отцу: "Но ведь Христос не существовал!". А он ответил "Да нет, Христос, конечно, существовал".
In other-bigger Interview to Russian magazine "Version" ("Версия") and second Russian TV channel RTR (1998) Svetlana spoke more about her father’s belief in God. She said, that later Stalin told her history of Christ. And she thinks that he was believer.
Stalin‘s wife Nadezhda maybe was an atheist, because she denied for nannies to talk about God with kids. But it was not big problem - by official version (maybe with God‘s help
4. At meeting of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee in 1933-09-12 Stalin gave speech where he told not to destroy and but prevent churches. Fragment of his speech sounds so: "Central Committee considers that it is impossible to designing buildings with destruction of temples and churches, what we must treat like monuments of architecture by Old Russian heritage. Agencies of the Soviet authority and workers'-villagers' militia are obliged to take measures down to the disciplinary and party responsibility on protection of monuments of architecture by Old Russian heritage."
Выписка из протокола заседания политбюро ЦК от 12.09.33 г.: "ЦК считает невозможным проектирование застроек за счет разрушения храмов и церквей, что следует считать памятниками архитектуры древнерусского зодчества". Органы Советской власти и рабоче-крестьянской милиции обязаны принимать меры вплоть до дисциплинарной и партийной ответственности по охране памятников архитектуры древне русского зодчества." Секретарь ЦК И.Сталин.
5. Under Stalin‘s insisting In 1939-11-11, Politburo of the Central Committee has admitted prosecutions of believers "inexpedient". In 1939-11-11 Stalin canceled Lenin's instruction from May, 1st, 1919 for N 13666-2 "About struggle against priests and religion" and gave orders to People's Commissariat of Internal Affairs (NKVD) to release from custody already arrested priests "if activity of these citizens didn’t harm the Soviet authority".
Выписка из протокола заседания политбюро ЦК от 11.11.39 г. В отношении к религии, служителям Русской Православной Церкви и православно верующим ЦК постановляет:
1) Признать нецелесообразным впредь практику органов НКВД СССР в части арестов служителей русской православной церкви, преследование верующих.
2) Указание товарища Ульянова (Ленина) от 1 мая 1919 года за №13666-2 "О борьбе с попами и религией", адресованных пред. ВЧК товарищу Дзержинскому и все соответствующие инструкции ВЧК-ОГПУ-НКВД, касающиеся преследования служителей русской православной Церкви и православно верующих, - отменить.
3) НКВД произвести ревизию осужденных и арестованных граждан по делам, связанных с богослужительской деятельностью. Освободить из-под стражи и заменить наказание на не связанное с лишением свободы осужденным по указанным мотивам, если деятельность этих граждан не нанесла вреда советской власти.
4) Question about destiny of believers from other confessions, who are under arrest, CC will rise additionally.
From section four we can see that Stalin was not well-wished for all religions - he defended just HIS own religion - Christian deviation: Russian Orthodox Church.
4) Вопрос о судьбе верующих, находящихся под стражей и в тюрьмах, принадлежащих иным конфессиям, ЦК вынесет решение дополнительно.
Секретарь ЦК И.Сталин
Lenin was an atheist and banned religion mostly because Church was rich and supported Monarchy-Tsar (Bible:NT:Ro:13:1 "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.") - was against parliamentarian government system and by that government was hanged his brother. Other thing, psychologist Giunter Cruse, who examined Vladimir Ulajnov’s (Lenin) genealogy tree, found that Lenin’s grandmother was burned on fire as which. Lenin has his reasons not to like Church. But even Lenin scraped with Stalin and tried to keep him from power until was alive because of Stalin’s cruelty. Why Russians hated church, especially after war? Church was flirting with Nazi in World War Two (Pius XI signed friendly agreement with Mussolini in 1929 and with Hitler in 1934). Fascism was born with Mussolini in Italy (Vatican’s cradle). It is good that USSR government didn’t see pedophile scandals - situation could be worse (no talking about Inquisition ant Crusaders). So it is normal, that Russians revenged to all, who collaborated with Nazi and fascists.
6. Juri Solowjew (Stalin’s Personal Guard for 10 years) claimed that in World War Two Stalin went to small Kremlins Church. (French, Austrian, Germany and Russian documentary "Inside the Kremlin: In the Heart of Russia" by Thomas Schreiber (2005, NDR Television in cooperation with Channel 1 Russia). It could be between years 1939 and 1945.
In interview to newspaper "Area the Falcon" with the head of the "Temple of All Sacred" Michael Aleksandrovich Rodin told: "Joseph Vissarionovich comes during war in our temple to pray. And even today there are parishioners alive - a few very older persons which remember this fact and saw Stalin themselves. Stalin as tell, came to a temple three times and long faced to two icons - Nikolay Chudotvorets and Kazan Divine Mother. Joseph Vissarionovich has not stood all service, its visits last 15-20 minutes."
В интервью для газеты "Район Сокол" старостой Храма Всех Святых Михаил Александрович Родин сказал: "Сам Иосиф Виссарионович заезжал во время войны в наш храм помолиться. У нас и сегодня живы прихожане - несколько очень пожилых людей, которые помнят этот факт и сами видели Сталина. Сталин, как рассказывают, приезжал в храм трижды и подолгу стоял перед двумя иконами - Николая Чудотворца и Казанской Божьей Матери. Всю службу Иосиф Виссарионович не выстаивал, его визиты длились минут по 15-20."
7. In 1942-1943 Stalin started to organze meetings with priests and incited to reopened Churches, seminaries, academies, publish religious magazines in "communistic speed" (as quick as possible) and promised full support. There are some documented speeches from these meetings:
M.I.Odincov "Russian patriarchs of XX century" year 1994, № 34 note of G.G.Karpov about Russian patriarchs welcome by J.V.Stalin 286 page (Одинцов М.И. "Русские патриархи ХХ века." 1994 год, № 34 записка Г.Г.Карпова о приеме И.В.Сталиным иерархов Русской Православной Церкви 286 стр.).
"Comrade Stalin told: "Well, as you want, this is your business and if you want theological class, begin with them, but the Government will not have objections and against opening seminaries and academies."
"Тов. Сталин сказал: "Ну, как хотите, это дело ваше, а если хотите богословские курсы, начинайте с них, но Правительство не будет иметь возражений и против открытия семинарий и академий."
"Comrade Stalin has told, that the church can count on comprehensive support of the Government in all questions connected with its organizational strengthening and development inside of the USSR and that, as he spoke about the organization of spiritual educational institutions, not objecting to opening of seminaries in dioceses so there cannot be obstacles and to opening managements of candle factories at eparchial and other manufactures."
"Тов. Сталин сказал, что церковь может рассчитывать на всестороннюю поддержку Правительства во всех вопросах, связанных с ее организационным укреплением и развитием внутри СССР, и что, как он говорил об организации духовных учебных заведений, не возражая против открытия семинарий в епархиях, так не может быть препятствий и к открытию при епархиальных управлениях свечных заводов и других производств."
"Then, addressing to me, Stalin has told: "It is necessary to provide the right of the bishop to dispose church's sums (money). It is no need to do obstacles for the organization of seminaries, candle factories, etc."
"Затем, обращаясь ко мне, т. Сталин сказал: "Надо обеспечить право архиерея распоряжаться церковными суммами. Не надо делать препятствий к организации семинарий, свечных заводов и т. д.".
8. English historian Simon Sebag Montefiore studied Stalin’s hobbies and personal library, what Stalin liked to read, what kind of marks he left in his books. He found that Stalin liked to quote long quotes from the Bible. Stalin left such mark about God in the book by Anatole France "Last pages. Dialogues under a rose. About God": "Don‘t know traces, don‘t see. There is no Him for them." ("Следов не знают, не видят. Его для них нет."). It seems that Stalin thought he knew God’s traces and saw God, not like others.
Stalin "denied categorically to prescribe atheistic literature to his personal library, fastidiously calling it ""antireligious waste-paper (junk)"". ("Secret life of Stalin : By materials of his books and archive : According to Stalinism" by Ilizarov.B.S. 2004)
Сталин "категорически запрещал выписывать в свою личную библиотеку атеистическую литературу, брезгливо называя ее "антирелигиозной макулатурой."" (Илизаров Б. С. "Тайная жизнь Сталина : По материалам его библиотеки и архива : К историософии сталинизма". 2004)
9. Stalin "hated" religion so much, that in 1951-06-27 he gaved "Stalin’s Prize" to English clergyman Hewlett Johnson. Various prizes under Soviet authority received and other priests.
10. Stalin's "pure atheistic" funeral. Honorary guard near Stalin's coffin.
Speech of the most holy patriarch Moscow and all Russia Aleksii before requiem on I.V.Stalin, told in the patriarchal cathedral in day of Stalin's funeral (9.03.1953): "There is no more the great Leader of our people, Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin. Great, moral, public force was abolished: force in which our people felt own force, in which was supervised in the creative works and the enterprises, in which was consoled for many years. There is no area where the deep look of the great Leader would not get. People of a science were surprised by his deep scientific awareness in the diversified areas, by his ingenious scientific generalizations; militaries – by his military genius; people of the most various work invariable received from him strong support and valuable instructions. As ingenious person he opened that was invisible and inaccessible to ordinary mind in each business.
About his intense cares and feats during Great Domestic war, about his ingenious management of the military actions, which gave us a victory over the strong enemy and in general above fascism; about his many-sided immense daily works on management, on a management of state affairs - vastly and convincingly spoke and in a press, and, especially, at last farewell today, in day of his funeral, his the nearest co-workers. His name as the advocate of world peace, and his famous acts will live in centuries.
We, who gathered for a pray about him, cannot pass with silence of his always benevolent, sympathizing attitude to our church needs. Any question with which we to him addressed, has not been rejected by him; he satisfied all our requests. And a lot of kind and useful, owing to his high authority, it is made for our Church by our Government.
Memory of him for us unforgettable, and our Russian Orthodox Church, mourning over his leaving from us, escorting him to last way, "in a way of all word", with a hot pray.
In these sad for us days, from different directions of our Fatherland from bishops, clergy and believers, and from abroad from Heads and representatives of Churches as orthodox, and other-believers, I receive set of telegrams which are informing about prays about him and condoling with us on the occasion of this sad loss for us.
We prayed for him when the message about his heavy illness has come. And now, when there is no more him, we pray for the world of his immortal soul.
Yesterday our special delegation in structure of high ordained metropolitan Nikolay; the representative of the episcopate, clergy and believers of Siberia of archbishop of the Palladium; the representative of the episcopate, clergy and believers of Ukraine of archbishop Nikona and ??? Nikolay, has assigned a wreath to his coffin and has bowed on behalf of Russian Orthodox Church to his dear ashes.
The pray, fulfilled with Christian love, reaches the God. We believe, as our pray about deceased will be heard by the Lord. Both to our loved and unforgettable Joseph Vissarionovich we devoutly, with deep, passionate love proclaim eternal memory."
Речь святейшего патриаха Московского и всея Руси Алексия перед панихидой по И.В.Сталине, сказаная в патриаршем соборе в день его похорон (9.03.1953 г.): "Великого Вождя нашего народа, Иосифа Виссарионовича Сталина, не стало. Упразднилась сила великая, нравственная, общественная: сила, в которой народ наш ощущал собственную силу, которою он руководился в своих созидательных трудах и предприятиях, которою он утешался в течение многих лет. Нет области, куда бы не проникал глубокий взор великого Вождя. Люди науки изумлялись его глубокой научной осведомленности в самых разнообразных областях, его гениальным научным обобщениям; военные - его военному гению; люди самого различного труда неизменно получали от него мощную поддержку и ценные указания. Как человек гениальный, он в каждом деле открывал то, что было невидимо и недоступно для обыкновенного ума.
Об его напряженных заботах и подвигах во время Великой Отечественной войны, об его гениальном руководстве военными действиями, давшими нам победу над сильным врагом и вообще над фашизмом; об его многогранных необъятных повседневных трудах по управлению, по руководству государственными делами - пространно и убедительно говорили и в печати, и, особенно, при последнем прощании сегодня, в день его похорон, его ближайшие соработники. Его имя, как поборника мира во всем мире, и его славные деяния будут жить в веках.
Мы же, собравшись для молитвы о нем, не можем пройти молчанием его всегда благожелательного, участливого отношения к нашим церковным нуждам. Ни один вопрос, с которым бы мы к нему ни обращались, не был им отвергнут; он удовлетворял все наши просьбы. И много доброго и полезного, благодаря его высокому авторитету, сделано для нашей Церкви нашим Правительством.
Память о нем для нас незабвенна, и наша Русская Православная Церковь, оплакивая его уход от нас, провожает его в последний путь, "в путь всея земли", горячей молитвой.
В эти печальные для нас дни со всех сторон нашего Отечества от архиереев, духовенства и верующих, и из-за границы от Глав и представителей Церквей, как православных, так и инославных, я получаю множество телеграмм, в которых сообщается о молитвах о нем и выражается нам соболезнование по случаю этой печальной для нас утраты. Мы молились о нем, когда пришла весть об его тяжкой болезни. И теперь, когда его не стало, мы молимся о мире его бессмертной души.
Вчера наша особая делегация в составе Высокопреосвященного митрополита Николая; представителя епископата, духовенства и верующих Сибири архиепископа Палладия; представителя епископата, духовенства и верующих Украины архиепископа Никона и протопресвитера о. Николая, возложила венок к его гробу и поклонилась от лица Русской Православной Церкви его дорогому праху. Молитва, преисполненная любви христианской, доходит до Бога.
Мы веруем, что и наша молитва о почившем будет услышана Господом. И нашему возлюбленному и незабвенному Иосифу Виссарионовичу мы молитвенно, с глубокой, горячей любовью возглашаем вечную память."
So, Stalin’s love to religion was not just right before his death, but started much earlier. Some people say, that Stalin reopened religion just because Hitler in Germany planed to attack Russia (therefore it is strange why Stalin didn’t believed, that Germany attacking USSR borders and argue that it is just propaganda by enemies right after invasion)... blah blah blah. Ok, maybe he told stories of Christ to his daughter Svetlana because he afraid Hitler too
Why Stalin was so cruel? Violent father, Church School and Priest’s Seminary formed his view to the World and how he can treat it. This had impact to his actions.
I.V.Stalin remembered: "From the protest against a humiliating regime and Jesuit methods which were in seminary, I was ready to become and really became the revolutionist, the supporter of Marxism (auth. notice: not(!) Atheism), as really revolutionary doctrine." – so we can thank for Stalin what he was to …Priest’s Seminary.
И.В. Сталин вспоминал: "Из протеста против издевательского режима и иезуитских методов, которые имелись в семинарии, я готов был стать и действительно стал революционером, сторонником марксизма, как действительно революционного учения."
USSR and COMMUNISM
USSR was not an ATHEISTIC, but COMUNISTIC/SOCIALISTIC republic’s union. People often don’t understand difference between Communism/Socialism and Atheism/Theism – one ideology is about "humans(rich) vs humans(poor)", other - "humans(all) vs God". Church functioned and was not fully oppressed in USSR – maybe, because KGB very successfully used it to spy on people through confessions. Church in USSR was separated from Government IN THE SAME WAY(!) as in USA, European Union and other civilized parts of the World. Because property of Churches was nationalized, Church and believers (especially in the West) started to conclude that it was "Atheistic" regime (of course, just atheists are capable to kill, rob and take neighbors property by force
Japan 64% Sweden 46% Denmark 43% France 43% Belgium 42% Germany 41% Netherlands 39% Britain 31% ------------------- Russia 24% China 8%
Communism (commun=collective/shared) is bad, because it contradict Darwin’s Evolution theory - unnatural equalization and collective/shared property removes natural selection and competition – motive, why to be better than others. People's needs always are larger, than possibilities and this force them not to enjoy what they have and push to move forward. Restriction of possibilities to supply self needs by setting some top limit it is the same as restriction enthusiasm to reach something higher. Governments must let to do everything if someone’s actions and reached benefit are not less than made harm to others in the reaching process. Everything what supply and does not include everyone else against their will – must be normal ant allowable. Problem is, that regarding to old convictions (maybe they were useful in old world model, but lost sense in new), not all people catch progress and slow down all train. Besides, even where religion power was not strong were no killings exactly in the name of atheism. You will not find banners or flags with words like "Atheism with us" and exhortation for atheist to unite and kill theists. Of course, not all atheists are good and all theists – bad. You can find bad people between atheists too. But believers often incrimination atheists what did believers. Maybe, it is difficult for theists to realize, that morality can come from human consciousness and lessons learned from narrow social relations with other humans, understanding, that you depend not only from yourself, but from others as well. And how you will treat others – others will treat you. Morality does not come just from God or priest‘s lectures. Thanks to Evolution and competition, survived these in which brains formatted behavior model to care about each other – groups, which members didn’t avoided compensate others (collective) weakness with their strongness survived better. It is was harder to attack and destroy that camp at cold night where weak-sleepy guard was not leaved with his own problem, but sometimes someone gave him hot tea or he was replaced by stronger-bouncy guard, letting him to sleep-rest and later to take post again... planning that latter he will help them who helped him.
Some Pol Pot fought against Buddhist RELIGION, therefore he was an atheist? Some Muslim fought against Christian RELIGION, therefore he was an atheist. Some Protestant fought against Catholic RELIGION, therefore he was an atheist.
If some person (like Stalin or Pol Pot) fights against some religion or religions, it doesn’t mean automatically, that he is an atheist. Some people are believers with their personalized-modified understanding of religion or God. And they fight against other religions or organized their own religion. For example: they can think that it is corrupted and perverted or there is no need in organized religion - God must be private thing, etc.. To accuse someone in atheism, you must refer not just what against that person fights, but refer to what that person supports, to his personal-positive views on atheism and religion. Stalin murdered almost all Soviet military elite before WW2… does it mean that he was anti-Soviet? Stalin killed communists as flies - does it make him anti-Communist? He saw this as clearing / purifying. For Stalin to murder someone was not a big deal... he just spread tickets to Heaven with light hand. How the Papal legate Arnaud-Amaury once said: "Kill them all! Surely the Lord discerns which ones are his". Christians slaughtered each other in thousands during all history. Does it make them non-Christians? Pol Pot fought against organized Buddhism, but… his regime’s core was trying to suppress individuality, therefore he tried to eliminate all differences between humans. Strange as that might seem… but this conception was inspired directly from the same Buddhism. Pol Pot studied at a Buddhist monastery and a Roman Catholic school too. So it would be nice, that believers would not throw all responsibility for Pol Pot’s behaviour and ideas on atheists. Pol Pot in his behaviour was stunningly irrational, illogical and totally stupid. He exterminated educated people, doctors, teachers – important part of atheism base. It would be nice to see more clear evidences, that he was an atheist than just: "Communism=Atheism" and "If you fight some denomination of religion you are an atheist".
VIOLENCE from RELIGION
Idea of Hell leads to violence. What is the point of the Hell? If Hell will be eternal suffering, then there is no final point, just pointless torture. If point is torture, until sinner will understand his sins, then isn't better way to make human to understand something – knowledge and education? If child committed mistake-sin (for example sealing or animal beating), what would be better to do to make sure that he would not mistake-sin again? Sit down and talk with him, explain how World works, explain social links, why stealing is bad, because it ruins society - his own environment, his life, how animals suffer and feel pain, explain about reversible effect of all actions, until he will understand (of course not all parents are smart and able to explain everything). Or it is better to beat your child, strip his nails off, scald his flesh with hot water and torture him? We all know that kids, who experienced violence in childhood from others (like Stalin), later are more violent. Raped become a rapists, beaten become a beater. If you beat your child for his mistakes-sins, with every strike your install in his brains conception, that beating is acceptable method to achieve your goals (especially when you are stronger). It makes beating OK if somebody doesn’t act how you like/want. That is why beaten in childhood beat others in the same way later, trying to achieve his goals, as same as his authority (father/mother) did in the past. Christian "education" idea through torture in Hell - is primitive, violent, and stupid. Whole civilised World knows already that if you want to grow a good human, you do it with education and knowledge, not with violence and torture (because people learn by copying others). Otherwise schools would be torture chambers. The main purpose and idea should be to repair broken humans in humane schools, not to destroy them finally in Hell by showing them new limits of sadism and torture. Is God so stupid and primitive that He doesn’t know better way to teach, than just through torture? Does He give priority to fist over intellect? Or it is just some stupid and primitive Christians with big fists and small brains are trying to apply what they master best? Therefore they created for themselves imaginable place, to enjoy in their minds suffering of those who don’t agree with them... and in such way they compensate their dissatisfaction in reality. If you can’t win opponent in reality, you can at least enjoy torturing him in your mind. Idea of Hell show us, how sick and sadistic in its core can be Christianity. Christianity still teaches conception of Hell and still don’t "understand", why religious fanatics as Hitler and Stalin (who received religious education) were so brutal and violent. Inquisition (tortures were used to retrieve lost sheeps to "right" patch and suffer for sins) was the same idea of Hell brought us into Earth by Church Inc. Until idea of Hell is alive, idea of Inquisition, teaching and achieving goals through torture and sadism is alive too.
Religion always leads to Inquisition with “Disprove God existence!”
Every time, when you make proposition and ask someone else to disprove this, you make an Inquisition act. In modern society court uses innocent presumption - when man reputed as innocent, until his guilt is not proved. Prove of guilt (proposition) must present accuser (proposer). Inquisition operated conversely. Inquisition court used guilty presumption - when someone threw proposition-accusation, and accused person was reputed as guilty… until disproving that he is not. And to disprove proposition-accusation supposed accused person. This let very easily to cope (crucify) with everybody by throwing any ridiculous propositions-accusations-claims …like “he is cooperating with the devil” or “she is a witch”. And it was more easier in the past, because accused person, who supposed to defend himself and desperately search for evidences of his innocence, as usual was imprisoned (as already guilty). And it is hard to find evidences for that, what never existed and exists. What evidence has nothing? Of course, the best evidence for nothing is ...nothing. But accusers wanted ...something... to disprove their nothing. In religious discussions between theists and atheists... theists until now throw proposition, that God exists, and waiting disproof of this proposition from atheists – what atheists almost always and try to do. Believers just rest and wait some visible or touchable evidences which could prove their ...nothing – none-existing God. Therefore atheists try to replace God-nothing with something (scientific explanations of things and events). Situation looks like Christians are waiting for some touchable and visible evidences for vacuum. Believers cannot prove their proposition (God) until now, so until now they are trying to use Inquisition tactics (guilty presumption) in debates. Therefore it is important always to alarm, when religion gain more power in society and society’s’ law, which determine human’s lives. Because until now... religion and its followers in thinking and methods are not more advanced as far as in 16 ages. I saw and see this guilt presumption method in religious society very often. Like newest - war in Iraq: People started war with Iraq believing in weapons of mass destruction without supporting these claims by strong evidences. And I saw and see this often in private lives, when people cope with their opponents by throwing accusations without evidences. Ant people don’t need evidences… all what they need it is just blind faith-belief and desire to crucify somebody. I care for better society for me and, maybe, my kids – this is reason, why I try to remove religious thinking and replace it by logic and reason.
Religion leads to populism and demagogy in politics and personal life.
At first I will present word of God from the Bible:
Bible:Ps:128:4 Lo, thus shall the man be blessed who fears the LORD. Bible:Jo:20:29 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe." (Who believe without evidences)
Religion-belief is directly involved in spreading not just guilt presumption, but also message, that somehow blind belief-faith without evidences has great value and even greater than belief based on evidences. After proposition, that God exists, believers still hold position that God exists… until His existence is not disproved by somebody (like atheists). Thanks to such thinking, anyone can throw proposition and people believe and accept it as truth without supporting evidences. And when it is accusation - consider accused person as a criminal. And in some cases even crucify him, if accused person is not capable in right time to disprove accusations – not all accused persons are very smart enough to do this. There is absolutely reversed situation in sceptic’s society, because sceptics appeal not on belief, but on evidences. And when somebody throws proposition or accusation, proposer-accuser must prove his claims himself. People request to show clear evidences for proposition-accusation in the first place. And just after that, when evidences are presented, proposition-accusation reputed as true and accused person as guilty. (As existence of God reputed as true just when His existence is proved with clear evidences). Incompetence or not-knowing, how to explain some things and events, are NOT evidences of God! It is evidences of incompetence and lack of person’s knowledge. It is not surprise, when unknowing person tries to present his unknowingness as “advantage” – he feels better when thinks that he at least has something valuable – his unknowingness – Jesus(God-Authority) personally value that... and who cares about small humans. It is not hard to understand, why in sceptic’s society, which appeals on evidences, more dominates innocent presumption and objective opinion …and in believer’s society, which appeals on propositions and belief without evidences, more dominates guilt presumption and bigger risk of preconceived opinion. Therefore in it very easy to crucify anybody with sometimes absolutely ridiculous claims - it is why believer’s society is not safe. It is why in believer’s society prospers injustice, populism and demagogy. It is why in believer’s society can win orators, who spiel with their gold-toque and give unreal promises without clear evidences, how these promises will be realized. People value persons (for example politics and priests) who can lie more and better without shame, who promise bigger golden mountains and Heaven for everyone. People value their leaders not just for what they already did today, but what they promise to do in the future too. And the more stronger is belief (blind faith)… the more overrated are promises over already realized tasks. It is why in America and other countries politics strongly support religion – it is wide open gate for them to trick-full common people, get power and control them. It is why I am against religion. It is why I support science, education, knowledge and appealing on clear evidences (not on blind belief-faith). Science, education, knowledge and appealing on clear evidences leads us to safer society and reduces possibilities for liars and bulshiters to enter politics and gain power …and doesn’t let to crucify innocent people so easily by setting against them blind crowd. And it is more difficult to reach agreement or right decision (for example in the same family) between two different opinions holding believers than between two persons, who base their arguments on logic and strong evidences.
Even if suppose that Hitler and Stalin were not religious themselves, but just exploited RELIGION of their people to realize ideas... this shows... that Hitler and Stalin appealed exactly on RELIGION (Christianity) to gain full power and realize their ideas more easily.
Vaidotas Jocys ([email protected]) |
.
- Login to post comments
c
Sweet thundering Jesus, did you read my post?
I'll post it here so you don't get lost:
Please don't ignore my posts and then claim I never addressed an issue. I even bolded the important part for you.
This doesn't address anything. What it does is demonstrate your intellectual dishonesty. I'm about to demolish this thing:
Really? You mean God is part of a Christian belief? Wow.
Secular beliefs cannot be attributed to religious beliefs, because a secular belief is non-religious by default.
"Look Ma! I got my secular beliefs from a religion!"
I wouldn't normally say this, but you are seriously retarded. Or, at least, you're acting that way at the moment.
Hitler's extreme anti-semitism was due to his religious ideology. Killing in the name of God is not secular.
*sigh*
So if a Christians fights poverty because God called him to do it, then fighting poverty is a religious belief?
When the French resistance though they were called by God to drive the Nazis out of France, anit-Nazism is a religious belief?
The Croix de Lorainne (The french resistance symbol)
Now comence with the back pedalling!
I have said before, you lack serious reading comprehension.
Bormann's Christianity is mentioned on page 245 of the Holy Reich where it states that he married into a pious family and never left the Protestant church.
"Fighting poverty" is an action or behavior, not a belief. This is where your use of logic is messed up.
Now, the belief that "we must fight poverty because God commands us to do so" is a religious belief.
If the French retaliate against Nazism because of their religious beliefs, then their anti-nazism is founded on a religious belief.
Backpedal what?
Secular beliefs come from religious beliefs! You heard it here, folks.
That's it? He was married to a protestant?
Personally, I was looking for a 'Hey everyone, look at me, Martin Bormann, still a Protestant! Hey everyone, I still love Jesus and God!'
I know he wouldn't have put it in those words, but you get the idea. Him saying he was still Protestant, believed in God, loved Jesus etc.
I mean, pretty much everyone belonged to a church, so the fact he belonged to one isn't surprising. He was probably forced to go as a child.
Okay, let me clear it up with an example.
Joe gives to charity and deticates his life to the poor.
Now, Joe is Christians so he says 'God told me to give to charity. By helping people, I am doing God's work.'
Now, did he give to charity because he was Christian or because he was a good person? I think it's because he was a good person. That is, he thought that fighting poverty was a good thing. Since he felt so strong about it and was Christian, he attributed it to God. If he was atheist, the only difference is that he wouldn't have attributed it to God.
Christians do it all the time. 'God gave me a sign', ' God talked to me' etc.....
The only reason they add God, is because of their belief.
I mean, honestly, France had plenty of secular reasons to drive out the Nazis. The whole oppression and persecution thing probably didn't sit well. And Hitler stole their cheese/wine.
Just as I say Hitler had secular reasons for his actions.
capiche?
Apologies, I thought you were going to with the argument that the French weren't basing them on religious beliefs. It is a common argument, so that's why I jumped the gun on that.
No, secular influences religious.
Now why do I say this?
Because of the diversity of any faith. Ask a Canadian Christian, vs a Russian Christian, or even an Americian Christian. You will get completly different interputations of the faith. Why? Because they were raised in different cultures, and hence add that to their faith. If it was the same all around, you would get the same answers. But you don't.
How do you distinguish between what is genuinely religiously-motivated and what is not?
Usually with great difficulty. If Joe said X action was inspired by God, it is usaully difficult to tell, unless you know about Joe very well.
Now, did religion have absoulty no bearing on Hitler? It probably did, but not to the extent people say it did.
In Hitler's case, it is easier to determine why, because he was a promanent figure and pools of infomation is at everybody's disposle. Usually Christians persecute Jews because of the Jew's religious beliefs. Hitler didn't, he did it because of Eugenics. Hitler, probably added the whole Christ killer thing, but my point with Bormann was that Nazism anti-semetism alone was enough to give rise to the holocaust. Bormann probably didn't even care if they killed Christ, but he wanted to eliminate them none the less. They both had the same goal (elimination of the Jews.) for the same reason (inferior race.), but Hitler added the Christ killer part ( I never understood why anti-semetic Christians over look, Jesus' Judiasm.). But, the point is the root, is still from Nazism.
My arguments aren't that it's not a factor, but that it's not a significant factor. That is, Hitler wouldn't be just some guy in Germany who went to art school if he was atheist. He would still have done it, because he drew from secular ideology (Nazism.) as was his anti-semetism.
How do you know Hitler's anti-semitism does trace back to a secular cause?
Nazis drew from lost of things to make the case for their supposed racial superiority: mysticism, archeology, philosophy, prophecy, religion. If the question is whether their beliefs were supported by scripture, I'd agree the influence is minimal. However, when you have an irrational ideology, it's difficult to say whether the kernel that motivated it initially, before many rationalizations sprang from it, came from bad science (their self-serving ethnic profiling), bad philosophy (their bastardized Nietzsche), bad prophecy (their bastardized Nostradamus), or anything else. Some Nazis believed they belonged to a divine race; how do we know that something like this wasn't their core motivation if they use it to rationalize their actions?
[edit: stuff added]
I want to put to rest once and for all the idea that the Nazi pogrom of Jews was not mainly motivated by religious attitude toward the Jewish population. In fact, the Nazi pogroms couldn't have been conceived without the prior centuries long tradition and history of anti-Semitism motivated entirely by religion. The Christian religion to be precise. It is entirely Christian anti-Semitism which is the origin for the basis of the Nazi pogroms of Jews.
I will quote exclusively from The Holocaust Third Edition, Donald L. Niewyk, Houghton Mifflin
'The low social and political standing of the Jew, and the profoundly negative opinion that the non-Jew held of him, had reinforced each other since the Middle Ages. His low status seemed to be warranted by his observance of a despised and worthless religion, and his being of that low status invited aspersion to be cast on his faith and character.'
In fact, Jews had been mistreated in societies all over Europe for quite some time, forced to obey specific laws (to wear identifying symbols) and forced to be a lower class of citizenry (where they were considered citizens).
'(Speaking of Germany) The 1969 constitution of the united state provided that the rights of the citizen did not depend on his adherence to any particular religion. With the creation of the Reich in 1871 the principle of equality was extended to all of Germany.'
'In France and Holland, emancipation had been a fact for three generations. In England, the first Jew entered parliament in 1858. This marked the end of the basic political disability of the Jews, a limitation that had stemmed from the close connection between church and state.'
'(Referring to what seemed to be the '...last flare of a dying fire (anti-Semitism) that would gradually burn itself out once Jewish naturalization became a fact in every country.' ) For precisely this reason, it came as a terrible shock when writers, politicians, and scholars in the 1870s, again attacked Jews and found their onslaught so well received by the general public that an entire movement sprang up, one openly proclaiming its opposition to Jews.'
I will stop quoting from the book there, for the remainder of what is to be said culminates in the creation of the Nazi party in Germany and the pogrom against the Jews. It would be dishonest to say that after the decline in religiously motivated anti-Semitism people did not find new reasons to hate the Jews, but these were reasons that had previously not existed before (distorted ideas of biological purity and evolution) and only lent to the attitude already present in people toward Jews, which was religiously motivated. It is not possible to conceive of a Hitler, let alone a Bormann had society not been steeped in centuries of Christian bigotry. These people didn't just happen upon the idea that Jews are lesser citizens in their time, they fostered ideas that had been extant throughout the history of their nation and Europe and gained tremendously from that. To say anything about the personal motivations of the likes of Hitler and Bormann and to suggest that they were in no way religiously motivated, is ridiculous. It is an insult to the Jew and those others that suffered through the Nazi pogroms. Are we to believe that the general German citizenry who participated largely willingly in the stripping of the Jews' recent emancipation were motivated by secular ideals? That is ridiculous. These people were anti-Semites and had a Christian history of anti-Semitism and participated willingly precisely because of this history and tradition and not because Hitler merely convinced them to and arrived at the notion of anti-Semitism merely through some secular thinking. The same would go for Bormann, he may have been of a particular variety of anti-Semite, but it was a variety (as all varieties are) that had its origin in Christian anti-Semitism. It would be dishonest on all accounts to suggest that the history of anti-Semitism (it being a history, until recently, involed only in anti-Semitism of a religious type) played a small part in the modern realization of the Nazi pogroms.
(Specifically, shame on Cpt_pineapple.)
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Because it's not your typical 'I hate Jews' type of anti-semetism. His reason was Eugenics, the same reason he killed senors, and disabled people.
You're right, it wasn't just one thing. However, I hold that religious role was minimal, because their hatred of the Jews made sense in context with their other clearly secular beliefs of how Germany holds the superiour race.
I think it's an insult to all the Christians who fought against Hitler to suggest the Christianity is the sole cause of the holocaust. It's also an insult to all the church clergy who hid Jews in their churches and personal homes at risk of the Gestapo's fury.
There were many Christians who stood up against Hitler. There are many Christians who helped the Jews avoid persecution and stood up to protect them.
I'm, not talking about the citizens, I am talking about the Nazis. The Nazis controlled the citizens with the Gestapo.
Why do you think they put Hitler in power in the first palce? Because he promised a better Germany, to bring Germany to it's full glory.
Germany was in a rut after World War I. Hitler promised a better solution, Hitler said that the Germans were the superiour race and Jews, seniors, disabled people etc... were the cause of Germany's ills and Hitler would fix that.
Honestly, that doesn't even address my argument. I'm talking about the Nazi motives for the anti-semitism, not the citizens.
No, that's not it. I said he married into a religious family and never left the Protestant church. So your raving Atheist has no problem with religious people and attends church. Would that point to someone who is rabidly anti-Christian as you continue to claim or does it point to someone who is religious?
The Nazis were citizens. Regardless of the Christians who did fight against the Nazis, it is Christian anti-Semitism which laid the groundwork for the Nazis in the first place. I will not repeat myself. You can continue to defend Christianity all you want (and to what end I don't care), but the fact remains that anti-Semitism has a basis and a tradition and a history that is inextricably linked to Christianity. It is Christianity that begot anti-Semitism in Europe! Hitler may have been interested in Eugenics, but he wasn't interested in killing the Jews for the sake of Eugenics and while he might have thought the German race was superior (and he indeed did offer Germany a way out of the rut following World War I), he targeted the Jews not incidentally. The Jews were targeted because people found it easy to be anti-Semitic, after all it had been a part of their culture and tradition for hundreds of years. Hitler was anti-Semitic himself and it cannot be incidental. He was a part of that culture too. You cannot remove the Nazis and Hitler and Bormann from the reality of anti-Semitism as it existed for hundreds of years in European history. They were influenced by that. It is the only reason they have for hating Jews. Anything else is an evolution of that reason or an add-on, even if they were Atheist.
I have never suggested that there weren't other motives behind the pogrom, but I maintain that at the core and what made it possible was the anti-Semitic tradition of Europe. Clearly other people than Jews were murdered during the pogrom and it's clear that anti-Semitism can't be responsible for the killing of gays, gypsies, and the rest, but anti-Semitism cannot be removed from the pogrom as it relates to the Jews because of otherwise secular reasons for the pogrom.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Your reasoning is off again. Way off.
Joe states, "God told me to give to charity. By helping people, I am doing God's work." We know from this statement that
1. Joe gave to charity because God told him to.
2. Joe believes that helping people is doing God's work, which also tells us
3. Joe believes that doing God's work is good.
None of this is secular.
Next, you call Joe a liar and accuse him of giving to charity for non-religious reasons. Look at your reasoning here:
1. Joe did it because he's a "good person", not because he's Christian;
2. "good person" means "because he thought it was a good thing"
Which brings us to the question: Why did Joe think it was a good thing?
Because Joe's religious beliefs tells him that it's good! You've just admitted that Joe gave to charity because of his religious beliefs.
Poor Pineapple. What has religion done to your mind? It's okay. You'll recover your use of logic soon, I hope.
Its perfectly simple really.
For 1500 years Christianity had been practicing anti-semitism. It was a christain thing inspired by their religious dogma. Christianity was the religion of Europe. Most people in Europe where Christians. The religion had a huge influence on all plotical and socialogical developments.
The Nazis anti-semitism was inflcuence by Christianity. In actual fact I would go so far as to say that it was directly caused by the previous 1500 years of christian anti-semitism. Now sure they may have tweaked a few ideas here and there and mixed it with their own nutcase ideas but the root cause was christianity. No blood libel, noinquesition, no catholic church then no anti-semitism and no anti-semitic views encompassed within Nazisim. There may well have still been Nazism but it would not have been antisemetic.
Now with regards to Hitler as a religious Nazi it stands to reason that this part of Nazism will have a greater influence. As he was a Christian as well as a Nazi the anti-semitism (caused by Bristianity but incorporated into Nazi ideology) would find more resonance with his thinking. It would be more important and as he was in charge we ended up at the gas chambers.
Other Nazis may well have been anti-semetic depsite the fact that they where less or non religious. Remember Hitler did have a certain influence on peoples thinking. His anti-semtic ideas, rooted in and egged on by his Christianity, would have spread so it is in etirely concievable that even secualr Nazi would become extreamly anti-semetic. But this does not detract from the undeniable fact that the root cause of this anti-semtism remains Christian dogma.
Ok, umm how to put this.....Hitlers extreme hatred of jews was and is derived of religious views of Europe at the time and the past, his idea of final solution is derived by his belief in positive or aryan christianity, that made Christ an arayan, therefore superior to the jews, therefore ALL ARYANS superiors to the jews and all other undesirables. As such it was a natural flow, sure the catholic and protestant churches had put the jews in ghettos, but it never had dealt with the jewish problem as it still persisted, which is part of why Hitler and to an extent bormann and other nazi's were ANTI-CHRISTIAN, but not ANTI ARYAN christian, which is also why bormann never really stopped the idea and the beginngs of the German national church based on positive christanity. So was Hitler against christianity, yes, all others except his own brand of christianity because he and many others in the nazi's party, but not all, believed that the other churches had become corrupt. Why is this such a hard thing to understand regarding hitler and his ANTI-CHRISTIANITY views? is it really that hard to comprehend?????
The reason why I brought up Gypsies, seniors etc..is because I think Hitler killed them for the same reason he killed the Jews. Their biological features, not their religion. There was surely no anti-Gypsie movements of anti-senior movements, but Hitler still targeted them. It was because of Eugenics.
Christian anit-semitism is based on religion, Nazism was based on race.
As for anti-semitism in Europe, it probably was a factor, I'm sure some were religious anti-semitic and joined the Nazis as an excuse to kill Jews. That is not my argument. My argument is that Nazi anti-semitism is founded on Eugenics, not religion.
I say this because if it was found on the religious anti-semitism, Hitler wouldn't have added the Eugenics portion. He would have persecuted them due to their religion, but he didn't, he did it due to their biological features.
Oh, and evilreligion, anit-semitism is not Christian dogma. Their is no indications in the Christian religion that Christians must be anti-semitic. In fact, Christianity is the fulfillment of Jewish profecy. If you watched the nightline debate, Ray Comfort said he was Jewish, Christ was Jewish etc....
I never said Joe was lying.
So what, you think Joe would be a prick if he wasn't Christian? The point is that Joe's action were secular and that he added the God part because of his religion.
Christians think every gooey feel good feeling can be attributed to God. This is no different.
@Pineapple
Do you have any examples of religious, but not ethnic, Jews being treated differently by Nazi Germany? That would support your claim.
I bring it up because I was listening to a speech by American Nazi Party leader George Lincoln Rockwell (don't ask), and he made the distinction between ethnicity and religion, saying he didn't care about persecuting religious, but not ethnic, Jews. He's probably lying, but that's what he claimed. He's not the voice of Nazi Germany, though, and his group was separate and marginal; and not even really approved of by Hitler, who didn't want a volatile Nazi presence in America making Germany seem like an immediate threat.
Cpt_Pineapple,
Anti-Semitism in Europe has its basis in Christianity. Anti-Semitism in Hitler's Germany has its basis in Christianity. It was not 'probably' a factor, it was the factor. I won't go over the entire thing again. You may either accept this fact and the consequences, or you can maintain what your position. You are, however, verifiably incorrect.
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
Hitler killed Jews as a race. I know this because even if someone of Jewish descent was another religion, they were still killed. That demostrates my point.
Thomathy I don't think you get my argument. So I'm going to ask you to repeat it to me. I want us to be on the same page before we continue this. Otherwise, we could just go around in circles.
It does support your view, but it wasn't what I asked. That demonstrates that ethnic Jews would be persecuted regardless of religion. But I asked for an example of religious -- but not ethnic -- Jews being excluded from persecution.
You forgot that Christianity spread hatred of Jews exactly as a race
. My grandmother never said that "Judaists killed Christ" …it was always "Jews killed Christ".
Oh, I see what your saying now. If anyone was of the Jewish religion, but not the Jewish race.
I can't. I don't think you can name someone of Polish decent and Hindu religion that was excluded from persecution, so I don't see your point.
Your grandmother was Hitler? Nice tidbit of info.
If you excuse my sarcasm the topic isn't what your Grandma thought, it's what Hitler thought.
I don't know your grandmother, but people rarely refer to religious Jews as 'Judiasts'. They use the term 'Jew'
Your logic is still faulty, and yes, there are people who claim they would not know right from wrong without the Bible to tell them so.
To say that people perform "secular actions" and merely "attribute it to God" is dishonest. Belief preceeds all conscious behavior (and even some subconscious behavior), which means your argument is backwards. Joe does not give to charity without a reason or belief that causes him to do so.
"He just thinks it's good to do cause he's a good person!"
Again, you are being dishonest. Why does Joe think it's good?
"God told me to give to charity."
Now, if Joe says that God told him to give to charity, no further reasoning is necessary on Joe's part. Joe can simply obey God and be happy that he is doing "God's work".
It is therefore not a secular action on Joe's part. Now, if the RRS gives to charity, that is a secular action. But Joe? He's only engaging in religious conduct.
Again, beliefs preceed actions. Your argument is irrational. Would Joe still do it if he wasn't Christian?
I don't know. Why don't you clarify what Joe's beliefs are so we can find out? Because from what you've provided, based on the evidence we have, it's most reasonable to conclude that Joe gave to charity because God told him to.
And since beliefs preceed actions, and we have a numerous amount of evidence from Hitler's own mouth demonstrating for us what his beliefs about Jews were, we know that Hitler's extreme anti-semitism was religious in nature.
Anti-semitism is religious in nature, anyway, if you haven't already noticed yet from the abundance of posts demonstrating this. The racist aspect of anti-semitism comes from the belief that all the descendents of the Jews were irrevocably evil due to their bloodline, and this bloodline carried specific physical characteristics.
"It's not religious, it's racism!" Hey, it's religious racism. When you're accused of killing God, it doesn't give you a very good reputation.
Oh, and Bormann? He has a Protestant background, and the Protestants were rampantly anti-Jew.
Martin Luther writes:
Also, Bormann was a little messed up.
So you see, anti-semitism is religious in nature. Hitler simply developed the religious conviction to engage in extreme anti-semitism.
But I can tell you're going to have to be refuted about a hundred more times.
By the way, how's the research on Strasser going?
Are you going to go ahead and tell me that there isn't an atheist who is anti-semitic?
What about his hatred of Seniors, disabled people, Gypsies? Are those religious too, or were they found in Eugenics?
Please repeat my argument so I can ensure that you are addressing the right points.
I have stuff to do, I'll get to it. Even if he kissed Jews all around and gave them candy, that still wouldn't mean that Nazism doesn't lead to Hitler's anti-semitism.
Nazism is a political ideology with different interputations.
Compare George Bush and Sen. Mccain. Both are Repuplicians, but they don't always agree on each other.
I'd laugh if Strasser was a Christian. It would be so ironic.
Lol Pineapple. First you argue about the widespread "secular" nature of Nazi anti-semitism, and now that Vjocys has refuted you, all of sudden you're concerned only with what Hitler thought. Not even a mention of Bormann.
Not only dishonest, but evasive too.
This is what Hitler thought, for the third or fourth time...
As you can see, Hitler affirms here exactly what Vjocys grandmother said. It is interesting to note that Hitler admires Jesus more for his fight against the Jews than for his suffering. How terrific was his fight against the "Jewish Poison", and it was precisely because of the "Jewish Poison" that Jesus had to die.
Dare I say it?
Pwned.
Your Polish/Hindu example only suggests a genetic motive for some of their crimes, but it doesn't clarify their position on Jewish ethnicity versus religion. It's still arguable that anti-semitic tradition was later rationalized into the Nazi genetic program. Your position supposes that anti-semitism in the Nazis is distinct from the broader history of anti-semitism because of the alleged genetic component; but I don't see a basis for imagining anti-semitism was abandoned on the grounds of religion, then rediscovered on the grounds of genetics. It's much simpler to suppose that anti-semitism existed because of religion, and was later incorporated by default into eugenics programs because so many people already hated the Jews without the pseudoscience.
My example, which I pointed out was precedented by George Lincoln Rockwell's claim, would provide explicit support for your claim. If you can produce words or deeds that suggest the German Nazis had different policies toward ethnic and religious Jews, I'll re-think this whole thing.
Hey, you said yourself you weren't talking about Vjocy's grandmother, so why are you talking about atheists? I thought you were only talking about Hitler.
I don't know if there's an anti-semitic atheist. Even if there was, it's irrevelant. Germany's anti-semitism was religious in nature, if you haven't already noticed by the abundant evidence provided in this thread, and I don't think you're gonna have any atheists marching around wearing a belt buckle that reads, "God With Us".
By George, he DOES lack reading comprehension!
Considering I addressed Vjocy's point in my post, if you care to read it for the first time.
Also considering I asked you to repeat my argument so I know you have it right. You couldn't even do that. Seriously, do you just hit 'quote' and spew whatever Bullshit you feel like?Someone got it right! Now can you teach Fateless7 how to read?
The Nazis had 'experts' that determined what race was superior or inferior. I believe they mostly used skull measurements to determine if they fitin with the superior race due to their physical features, or were inferior and had to be eliminated as 'undersirables.'
Guess which ones the Jews fell into.
*edit*
Fateless7, what Strasser are you refering to? Otto or Gregor?
You did not address Vjocy's point, you merely evaded it. "Oh, well, your argument doesn't matter cause I'm only talking about Hitler".
And then you contradict yourself by bringing up atheists.
If you haven't noticed, your argument is constantly changing. You're evasive. And the post you just called "bullshit" was a direct response to:
So I showed you what Hitler thought.
Is it BS? Then prove it, because you're only getting refuted left and right.
Are you suggesting there was a possibility their "scientists" wouldn't have found the Jews "inferior" by their standards? It wouldn't surprise me if they based their standards on people they already hated, but that's speculation on my part. I understand your premise, I just don't see support for it beyond taking the Nazi genetic rationalization at its word in spite of the massive precedent for anti-semitism prior to the introduction of the specious genetic component.
More dishonesty, however not surprising coming from you. You mention nothing about the reason Jews were racially profiled. It's quite simple, and if you haven't read Hitler's quotes, let me spell it out for you:
The entire bloodline of the descendants of the Jews that "killed God" and were "forsaken by God" was to be fought against. This bloodline was determined by racial features, not by the Jew's religion.
This racial profiling was religious in nature.
Why did these Germans consider themselves the superior race? You think they just sat down one day and thought, "Ya know... I kinda like the shape of your skull better than that guys'. Wanna start a club?"
It is possible, but doubtful. I think they based their standards off of Neiche or something like that. I'll have to double check that.
More lack of reading comprhension! I did mention why Jews were racially profiled!
I even asked you a question, and you didn't even respond.
I never said that Nazism was rational.
The Strasser I referred to was specified in an earlier post, however, you haven't responded to my question either:
Why were these Germans considered a superior race?
You were not honest about the religious beliefs behind the racial profiling, and I have now demonstrated that explicitly.
Racial religion. Christ = member of the Nordic race = Germans.
Hitler believed Jews killed Christ. Bad news for Jews back then.
Doesn't get any clearer than that.
RELIGIOUS RACISM.
Pwned again.
You're not being honest with the fact that the 'religious bloodline' went against teachings of Christian churches in Germany. Rosneberg rejected mainstream Christian teachings.
See this is where one of my previous arguments come in.
I'm just saying I doubt anyone was like, "OMG the j00z is inferiors sez my calipor!!1" Being loutish German nutters, I'm guessing they started with the premise that German-like qualities were good, and surprise, surprise, ethnic Jews weren't German-like. It's not like some real science was taking place here, it was just an exercise in bigotry dressed up as science. The question was whether they drew the line at religious bigotry; abandoning a religious tradition of anti-semitism, and sticking to a principled racial bigotry that happened to lead right back into anti-semitism. Again, if somebody said or did something to suggest religious -- but not ethnic -- Jews were treated better, I would change my view.
What's "Neiche?"
That Hitler was a baptized Christian is not arguable. That he lived any Christian religion is. The philosophy of the Nazi Party is derived from Theosophy (a bastardization of Vedic Hinduism), pan-Germanism, and the ravings of the Thurle Society, a Masonic like society based on German pagan traditions, with the aim of ushering in a Aryan Germanic religious revival. Thurle members included Julius Streicher, Rudolf Hess, Dietrich Eckart and Alfred Rosenberg. Another Thurle member, Karl Wiligut, became Himmler's chief adviser on mythology.
Heinrich Himmler was deeply interested in occultism.
Hitler was a rank opportunist, who used his gift of oratory to swayy the masses to his views. If, in that effort, he had to resort to using religiius terminoligy than, so be it.
By the way, the sentence "Gott mit uns" imprinted on the German Army belt buckles was the traditional motto of the German soldier. The motto had been displayed on German military belt buckles since the time of Frderich the Great.
German racism was based on the racial superiority of Aryans, the hatred of Jews came, not out of the so-called "Chirstian" anti-Semitism, but out of the conviction that Jews were genetically inferior, as were Slavs (including Poles), Roma (gypsies), and Africans.
"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
We know Hitler wasn't practicing "according to Hoyle" Christianity -- the big tip off being the blindingly white Jesus they worshipped. We also know the genetic rationale given for their crimes against humanity. The issue we're discussing is whether Hitler's anti-semitism had its roots in German Christian tradition (their particular interpretation and practices); I acknowledge that it diverged after that. If you grew up with the notion that a certain minority (religious or ethnic not being clear) was descended from people who murdered your deity, it's hard for me to imagine, if you're bigoted against them later, you had managed to start fresh and hate them for new and unrelated reasons.
The litmus test I have on the topic is whether Hitler's regime had distinct policies for ethnic and religious Jews. It's an odd prospect, but not unprecedented. The American Nazi George Lincoln Rockwell did make the distinction, claiming not to be bigoted against religious Jews, rather only ethnic Jews. If a word or deed making the distinction among German Nazis is shown, that would support the idea that the prejudice wasn't religious in nature.
I am confounded by the ignorance that spurs this idea that Germans (or any Europeans) were not anti-Semites for 1500 years prior to the manifestation of the Nazi party. As I have shown, the Jews were not even emancipated in Germany until 1871 and the year before (emancipation was written into the constitution in 1869), in 1870, people were still vehemently anti-Semitic. Germans did not stop hating Jews because of their religion and start hating Jews because they were ethnically inferior. One preceded the other, that much is certain, and it follows that the evolution of anti-Semitism found ethnic inferiority compatible with the previous 1500 years of Christian anti-Semitism.
Fortunately, the Nazis were crazed bureaucrats, and the Holocaust is perhaps the most well documented historical event in human history. Magilum's test can be tested. Most reading on the Holocaust will show that the Nazis kept records tracing a person's relation to a Jew, either ethnically or religiously to one fifth of that person's heritage and that there are accompanying descriptions of what treatment a Jew of particular decent would receive - that is, depending on the proximity in heritage to being fully Jewish. Any person practising the Jewish religion was given a chance to convert. This was no guarantee that the Nazis would not later brutalize these people or send them to the ghettos, or later, the concentration camps. In fact, converts were often brutalized by the general Christian public and were outcast by Jews. In many cases, converts were continuously watched for signs that they did indeed convert. Necessarily, those who's conversions were found to not be genuine were arrested. The Nazi's did not discriminate between religious Jews or ethnic Jews and had specific policies for religious Jews as well as ethnic Jews. It hardly seems that if the Nazis were interested only in the ethnic inferiority of Jews that they would develop policies and allow practising Jews to convert to Christianity in order to avoid the ghettos and concentration camps (not that it worked for many converts).
BigUniverse wrote,
"Well the things that happen less often are more likely to be the result of the supper natural. A thing like loosing my keys in the morning is not likely supper natural, but finding a thousand dollars or meeting a celebrity might be."
You've conceded the argument.
All you're doing now is agreeing with me. Hitler's anti-semitism was not secular. Religious racism. Move on.
By the way, I'm not letting you change the subject just because you're too dishonest to admit you were wrong.
"Uh... no, we're not talking about whether it was a secular belief or not! Dur, uh... yeah! We're talking about... whether they were mainstream religious beliefs! That's the ticket!"
For future reference, I'm not someone you should play the deception card against.
Sorry, Pineapple already tried that. The problem with your argument is that it completely ignores the reason behind the racial superiority, pretending that it arose from secular beliefs. That's not completely honest. Let me post this again because you must not have seen it.
You see, like I said, these weren't a couple of guys sitting around talking about how, for no particular reason, they just didn't like the shape of another guy's skull, and gosh darnit, they needed to do something about it.
The driving force behind Aryan superiority was the belief that Christ was Aryan; these particular Germans, therefore, considered themselves the descendants of God. Because it was such a dominant belief that the Jews killed Christ, and it was also taught that the Jews were forsaken by God, extreme anti-semitism developed. Hitler believed himself to be the "hand of God" taking retribution against them.
This wasn't just a Christian related belief, it was centered on Christ.
Actually, that's not the issue we're discussing. The topic was that Hitler's beliefs were secular. This whole conversation began in response to one of Pineapple's posts, which claimed that Hitler was indeed a Christian, but it didn't matter because he followed secular beliefs. Pineapple later tried to evade this fact (as you can see, Pineapple has tried to change the subject several times), but it's pretty hard to do when I can just quote the original post he/she made.
Some Christians like to say that Hitler was atheist. And I don't blame them, since they already have the Inquisition and the Crusades and Manifest Destiny glaring at them. But because overwhelming evidence points to Hitler's Christianity, theists like Pineapple resort to the argument that Hitler was a Christian, but it just didn't matter. What they are basically saying is that Hitler may as well have been an atheist.
Of course, Hitler's anti-semitism was Christ centered, God belief centered, and the entire Aryan superiority concept had its roots in the "Aryan Christ" belief. "We are superior because we are descendants of God". It's a lot like white supremacy in America.
Sorry, but no. They viewed all history as a struggle against the races. They viewed white are the supreme race. Why? Because they were white themselves and thought the other races were bringing them down. This stemmed from the rut Germany was in after WWI. Germany was hit with sanctions and a shitty economy, so Hitler used the Eugenics and Nordic thoery to show that Germany was to rule the world.
A Nazi illustration of the perceived Nordic master race. The caption reads roughly, "German bearing, German achievements prove the Nordic racial heritage!"
They also viewed it as a struggle against communism and pacifism.
So you see, they applied it to all history.
And BTW, it's dishonest to cherrypick.
Sorry, but they didn't.
http://www.britannica.com/holocaust/article-9007807
Nazi anti-Semitism, which culminated in the Holocaust, had a racist dimension in that it targeted Jews because of their supposed biological characteristics—even those who had themselves converted to other religions or whose parents were converts.
I already posted this.
German achievements prove the Nordic Racial Heritage.
And what was the Nordic Racial Heritage?
Descendants of Christ.
I'm sorry, but you have serious problems. You've already tried using incomplete information to make your arguments and you're about to get pwned again. But, hey, be my guest.
Hitler believed Germans/Aryans were the descendants of Christ, and that Jews must be persecuted for killing Christ and for their "God forsaken" nature. The argument that "German achievement proves our heritage" amounts to saying: "See? We are the descendants of Christ because we're doing so much better than the Jews." It's like the Westboro Baptist Church using the deaths of soldiers as an example of their god's anger at America. It's like a football team winning the game and one of their players saying, "Well, we prayed hard and God was with us."
Funny. That's exactly what the Nazi belt buckle said: "God With Us".
German/Aryan superior was Christ centered. You say "they applied it to history". And that's right, because they had a history of Christian anti-semitism as nearly everyone in the thread has been telling you.
Care to get pwned again?
Speaking of dishonest, Fateless7
Some of these policies were opposed to by Hitler, who thought they were too radical and too alienating from parts to the German people (middle class and some Nazi-supporting nationalist industrialists in particular), and the Strasser faction was defeated at the Bamberg Conference (1926), with Joseph Goebbels joining Hitler. Humiliated, he nonetheless, along with his brother Gregor, continued as a leading Left Nazi within the Party, until expelled from the NSDAP by Hitler in 1930.
Thanks for recommening I look up Strasser.
Read my other post. I expose your dishonesty with Strasser.
Honestly, now all your doing is cherrypicking.
“OUR STARTING POINT IS NOT THE INDIVIDUAL, AND WE DO NOT SUBSCRIBE TO THE VIEW THAT ONE SHOULD FEED THE HUNGRY, GIVE DRINK TO THE THIRSTY, OR CLOTHE THE NAKED . . . . OUR OBJECTIVES ARE ENTIRELY DIFFERENT: WE MUST HAVE A HEALTHY PEOPLE IN ORDER TO PREVAIL IN THE WORLD.”
JOSEPH GOEBBELS, MINISTER OF PROPAGANDA, 1938 —
“IF ONE IMAGINES ... A BATTLEFIELD COVERED WITH THOUSANDS OF DEAD YOUTHS ... AND THEN OUR INSTITUTIONS FOR IDIOTS AND THEIR CARE ..., ONE IS MOST APPALLED BY ... THE SACRIFICE OF THE BEST OF HUMANITY WHILE THE BEST CARE IS LAVISHED ON LIFE OF NEGATIVE WORTH.”
— KARL BINDING AND ALFRED HOCHE, AUTHORIZATION OF THE DESTRUCTION OF LIFE UNWORTHY OF LIFE, LEIPZIG, 1920
Sounds like they're going for a 'healthy' society.
Hitler and eugenics
Hitler had read some racial-hygiene tracts during his period of imprisonment in Landsberg Prison. The future leader considered that Germany could only become strong again if the state applied to German society the basic principles of racial hygiene and eugenics.
Hitler believed the nation had become weak, corrupted by the infusion of degenerate elements into its bloodstream.[citation needed] In his opinion, these had to be removed as quickly as possible. He also believed that the strong and the racially pure had to be encouraged to have more children, and the weak and the racially impure had to be neutralized by one means or another.