NationStates Jolt Archive

This came up in the Evolution is a Myth thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=509411) but after 66 pages I figured that it was probably time for a new post.

I sort of wondered where the resentment of evolution as an idea came from. It seemed strange to me that someone would claim to have researched the theory , and then in the next breath spout a whole heap of bizarre, unsubstantiated drivel

then I checked out this site (linked to from Francis Collins' entry in Wiki as he was conned into appearing on it)

Darwin was Hitler's Muse (http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/default.asp?ID=crm&ec=I1301)

The level of misinformation is staggering... I imagine that this is just a small fraction of the kind of bizarre propaganda that is out there. It really is terrifying.

The idea that the existence of the electric chair would somehow prove that the theory of electromagnetism was incorrect. Or that our knowledge of how electricity works somehow makes us a less moral society is simply ridiculous...

and yet linking Evolution and Hitler's holocaust is somehow fair game... not to mention the misrepresentations (totally nonexistent fossil record etc etc...)

Its no wonder there are so many confused folk out there. Its willful misinformation. I just can't believe that the people that made the video actually believe this stuff... they have to be maliciously spreading false info with the idea of somehow fooling people into believing that religion is the only way... instead of presenting people with the info and letting people come to their own conclusions.

I have no problem with people seeking religious explanations .. but the idea that you have to somehow misrepresent science in order for people to allow themselves to be religious really belittles peoples faith..

I think it is simply disgusting!!

Not only that, but the Nazi ideology was influenced by social Darwinism, which actually predates Darwin's Origin of the Species and only got it's current name long after it was first propagated.

Hitler interpreted Darwinism about as well as he interpreted Christianity's, seeing how he considered himself both a Darwinist and Christian.

This came up in the Evolution is a Myth thread (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=509411) but after 66 pages I figured that it was probably time for a new post.

I sort of wondered where the resentment of evolution as an idea came from. It seemed strange to me that someone would claim to have researched the theory , and then in the next breath spout a whole heap of bizarre, unsubstantiated drivel

then I checked out this site (linked to from Francis Collins' entry in Wiki as he was conned into appearing on it)

Darwin was Hitler's Muse (http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/default.asp?ID=crm&ec=I1301)

The level of misinformation is staggering... I imagine that this is just a small fraction of the kind of bizarre propaganda that is out there. It really is terrifying.

The idea that the existence of the electric chair would somehow prove that the theory of electromagnetism was incorrect. Or that our knowledge of how electricity works somehow makes us a less moral society is simply ridiculous...

and yet linking Evolution and Hitler's holocaust is somehow fair game... not to mention the misrepresentations (totally nonexistent fossil record etc etc...)

Its no wonder there are so many confused folk out there. Its willful misinformation. I just can't believe that the people that made the video actually believe this stuff... they have to be maliciously spreading false info with the idea of somehow fooling people into believing that religion is the only way... instead of presenting people with the info and letting people come to their own conclusions.

I have no problem with people seeking religious explanations .. but the idea that you have to somehow misrepresent science in order for people to allow themselves to be religious really belittles peoples faith..

I think it is simply disgusting!!

We live in a world where the more minds you lead to your cause the more power you have. Through past expeirence going to a fundy school with a couple NSers here I know what ya mean. Everyone wants power. :(

Hitler interpreted Darwinism about as well as he interpreted Christianity's, seeing how he considered himself both a Darwinist and Christian.

Hitler wasn't Christian, I heard he threw them into death camps along with Jews. Plus having seen many documentaries on WII and Hitler he was indeed an ocultist.

Well, it stars America's favorite transvestite Ann Coulter, so we know it's a crap movie.

Why can't people accept that scientists know more than those of us who aren't educated to their level and thus they know what the hell they are talking about when it comes to scientific theories? Why can't we accept that without the education we've no basis for arguing against a scientific theory? Why can't we just take our egos and shove them up our asses where they belong rather than try to shove them up everyone else's?

Social Darwinism is to evolution as Christian Identity is to Christianity.

I agree. There's no need to lie about it, because you just give credibility to that in which you argue against. Let's face it, Creationists will not convince Evolutionists differently and vice-versa. There's no need to fight over it.

Hitler wasn't Christian, I heard he threw them into death camps along with Jews. Plus having seen many documentaries on WII and Hitler he was indeed an ocultist.They've already got documentaries on the Wii? Get outta hia! :D

Hitler interpreted Darwinism about as well as he interpreted Christianity's, seeing how he considered himself both a Darwinist and Christian.

He wasn't a Christian, he was occultist.
He wasn't a Darwinist, as no such thing exists.

Even I find this absurd. "Shakey scientific ground"? No sorry, it is all but proven however its flawed in not realising God set it motion.

Even I find this absurd. "Shakey scientific ground"? No sorry, it is all but proven however its flawed in not realising God set it motion.

It doesn't matter what set it into motion as that has nothing to do with the evolutionary theory. Indeed, evolution could in fact work with Creationism since the evolutionary theory doesn't care what started it: it only concerns itself with the actual evolutionary process itself, something a lot of Creationists fail to understand.

Anything James Kennedy spews about evolution automatically can be ignored.

Don't worry about his misinformation. He preaches to the choir.

I like the lineup. Annie, Behe, Moonie James......

Too bad it costs money. ;)

It doesn't matter what set it into motion as that has nothing to do with the evolutionary theory. Indeed, evolution could in fact work with Creationism since the evolutionary theory doesn't care what started it: it only concerns itself with the actual evolutionary process itself, something a lot of Creationists fail to understand.

Yeah this is definitely scaremongering as part of some sort of religious brainwashing.

There is no inherent conflict between the advancement of knowledge of the natural world (science) and the study of the spiritul world (theology). They are completely separate pursuits...

If you want to argue with evolution you have to do it using science.

If you want to argue with God then you have to do it on theological terms.

It doesn't help either field to dishonestly blur the two fields together...

Let alone use some sort of hateful smear campaign.

Anything James Kennedy spews about evolution automatically can be ignored.

Don't worry about his misinformation. He preaches to the choir.

I like the lineup. Annie, Behe, Moonie James......

Too bad it costs money. ;)

Behe is on there...

Wow, that right there pretty much discredits it fully and completely. :D

Behe is on there...

Wow, that right there pretty much discredits it fully and completely. :D

"Spend money and you too can become enlightened!"

Ah, the way religion is perverted to make money...so typical of humanity...

Did anyone look at the panel of 'experts'?
More importantly, did you look at Ian Taylor:
http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/images/experts/img-itaylor.jpg
What the hell is wrong with him? It looks like someone's photoshopped his face!
No way can that be real.

How much does one have to smoke to come up with this shit:

One of the most important ways that Darwinism revolutionized thinking about morality, especially relation to bioethics and medical ethics, was by introducing a new idea of what death is. The Judeo-Christian conception of death is that death is an enemy that is to be overcome and, ultimately, will be overcome through Christ, but the Darwinian vision is that death is a positive force that brings progress. And, in fact, the more death, the more progress, the more people are born, the more variation you have. This gives more possibilities for good variations.
Darwin said death is positive and should be encouraged?
WTF?

As for the 'more people are born': Excuse me if I'm wrong, but isn't it the religos who are having the most babies?

Or this crap, for that matter:

You can take examples of ancient creatures, apes that once walked the earth, and you can take an example of a human being, fossils from a human being, and you can look at those two side by side, and I'll say, "Where is the evidence that one became the other?" There is no evidence. What we see is two different, similar maybe in some ways, fossils that represent two different kinds of animals.
wrong on so many levels, that I can't even begin to think where to start.

Or this crap, for that matter:

wrong on so many levels, that I can't even begin to think where to start.

Of course. It's because they are complete and utter idiots who don't understand how to educate themselves on the science because they don't want to face the science because they think it goes against their little world view and because they think everyone else has to think the way they do because they are complate and utter idiots who should just learn how shove their shit back up their own asses before we do it for them!

*collapses from lack of oxygen*

Hitler interpreted Darwinism about as well as he interpreted Christianity's, seeing how he considered himself both a Darwinist and Christian.
I heard Hitler was a Catholic, this was coming from one of those evil nut-job Liberals.

Himmler liked the Occult, not sure about Hitler, he thought Himmler could be a bit foolish, LOL Army Group Vistula...
Anything James Kennedy spews about evolution automatically can be ignored.

Don't worry about his misinformation. He preaches to the choir.

I like the lineup. Annie, Behe, Moonie James......

Too bad it costs money.;)
Imagine if it was Jamie Kennedy.:p

Of course. It's because they are complete and utter idiots who don't understand how to educate themselves on the science because they don't want to face the science because they think it goes against their little world view and because they think everyone else has to think the way they do because they are complate and utter idiots who should just learn how shove their shit back up their own asses before we do it for them!

*collapses from lack of oxygen*

Indeed. They don't look at all of the specimens as a whole, instead one at a time, and comare it to humans. However, when you comare them all, in a timeline, there is a definate progression to human like traits. Of course, they take things to exist in a vacuum... but heh.

I heard Hitler was a Catholic,

That would make him a Christian.

That would make him a Christian.

Not to some sects. Some consider Catholicism more or less very evil, and very not Christian. But meh, mere semantic.

Indeed. They don't look at all of the specimens as a whole, instead one at a time, and comare it to humans. However, when you comare them all, in a timeline, there is a definate progression to human like traits. Of course, they take things to exist in a vacuum... but heh.

You know what really gets me? The amount of technology they use these days to shovel their shit. The amount, in essence, they rely upon science to argue against science. They don't realize just how stupid they make themselves look. What's worse, their supporters don't either, even though they really should. It's sickening, disgusting, and just plain makes me angry.

You know what really gets me? The amount of technology they use these days to shovel their shit. The amount, in essence, they rely upon science to argue against science. They don't realize just how stupid they make themselves look. What's worse, their supporters don't either, even though they really should. It's sickening, disgusting, and just plain makes me angry.

Pretty much. Most of these people think that Darwin one day thought "Hey! This evolution idea seems pretty good. I'm going to go and find evidence for it!"

Which didn't happen. He observed what was going on, and formulated a hypothesis on his observations. And so far, that hypothesis(Now a theory) has been held up not only by futher observation, but also by testing and exeriments. Infact, most of the people whom try and discredit evolution don't even test against it, they just use assumptions and fancy words. Of course, science is all about testing your ideas, but don't tell them that.

http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/experts.asp?ID=crm&ec=I1301

Despite the misinformation on the site, what I find most amusing is that, except for Coulter, they are all white males.

Couldn't find even one token-black-guy? I think these guys might be into eugenics...they are obviously weeding out diversity. :p

That would make him a Christian.
That it would.
But Catholics are better than other Christians.

Hitler was only an occultist as sort of a hobby. He, in fact, was neither Christian nor Occultist. Rather, he intended to create a new "religion" of Naziism. He was very interested in using the "Aryan" work of Wagner, which was based on Norse mythology. While most Germans of the time were indeed Christian, the Nazi's waged war on the christian religous authorities tere almsot as effectively as he did against Judaism in General. Christianity was only allowed if it didn't argue, or push the point that Jesus was a nice guy whose ethos was set against the Nazi's. Wikipedia it, and I think there are some interesting articles that describe how Hitler and Goebbels and erm...I can't remember the last guys name... effectively killed Christian worship and replaced it with Naziism during and before the war years.
Funny that he focused so hard on Nords being "Aryan". I can never decide if he was simply delusional there or trying to make the whole thing up...


But Hitler did indeed debase Darwinian evolution by jumping on the phrase "survival of the fittest," which Darwin never actually said or wrote.
Darwin described natural selection as the survival of individuals who were best adapted to an environment leading to a steady increase of those traits which were inherited, whether said traits nevessarily led to suitability for survival or not. In general those favored traits would increase in the population, thus leading to evolution over a long period of time.

The term "best adapted" fits Dawin better than survival of the fittest, which he felt was...too easily turned into a racist argument.

Seangoli, Darwin didn't so much observe lots of things (obviously he did) but he more importantly tied a hundred threads of thought by others into a coherent explanation of evolutionary thought. Which was still missing the idea of Mendalian Genetics, which oddly enough was in a book on Darwin's shelves at the time he went to press he he he!

Herbert Spencer actually coined the term "survival of the fittest," and Darwin only grudgingly accepted it.

and thus endeth the lesson in Nazi History and Anthropological history... sorry to talk so much ;)

http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/experts.asp?ID=crm&ec=I1301

Despite the misinformation on the site, what I find most amusing is that, except for Coulter, they are all white males.

Couldn't find even one token-black-guy? I think these guys might be into eugenics...they are obviously weeding out diversity. :p
Probably because most black Christians would have nothing to do with them, as they tend to lean more towards the left. No surprise there. :D

Hitler was only an occultist as sort of a hobby. He, in fact, was neither Christian nor Occultist. Rather, he intended to create a new "religion" of Naziism. He was very interested in using the "Aryan" work of Wagner, which was based on Norse mythology. While most Germans of the time were indeed Christian, the Nazi's waged war on the christian religous authorities tere almsot as effectively as he did against Judaism in General. Christianity was only allowed if it didn't argue, or push the point that Jesus was a nice guy whose ethos was set against the Nazi's. Wikipedia it, and I think there are some interesting articles that describe how Hitler and Goebbels and erm...I can't remember the last guys name... effectively killed Christian worship and replaced it with Naziism during and before the war years.
Funny that he focused so hard on Nords being "Aryan". I can never decide if he was simply delusional there or trying to make the whole thing up...


But Hitler did indeed debase Darwinian evolution by jumping on the phrase "survival of the fittest," which Darwin never actually said or wrote.
Darwin described natural selection as the survival of individuals who were best adapted to an environment leading to a steady increase of those traits which were inherited, whether said traits nevessarily led to suitability for survival or not. In general those favored traits would increase in the population, thus leading to evolution over a long period of time.

The term "best adapted" fits Dawin better than survival of the fittest, which he felt was...too easily turned into a racist argument.

Seangoli, Darwin didn't so much observe lots of things (obviously he did) but he more importantly tied a hundred threads of thought by others into a coherent explanation of evolutionary thought. Which was still missing the idea of Mendalian Genetics, which oddly enough was in a bookon Darwind shelves at the time he went to press he he he!

Herbert Spencer actually coined the term "survival of the fittest," and Darwin only grudgingly accepted it.

and thus endeth the lesson in Nazi History and Anthropological history... sorry to talk so much ;)
That is a really good first post, congratulations. :)

Yeah, I know how far fundamentalists can go when it comes to atheists. In Ann coulters book she said that she laughed at any co-religionist that doesen't think Dawkins[famous atheist, wrote alot of books about religion] will burn in hell.

Look at this page, I mean seriously. Christian threat mails (http://richarddawkins.net/theUgly)

To some extent, even if i'm liberalistic, I don't believe people should be able to just say and think whatever they want, religion is to me, a pain and sickness that kills the truth, and has been killing it for thousands of years.

Hitler was only an occultist as sort of a hobby. He, in fact, was neither Christian nor Occultist. Rather, he intended to create a new "religion" of Naziism. He was very interested in using the "Aryan" work of Wagner, which was based on Norse mythology. While most Germans of the time were indeed Christian, the Nazi's waged war on the christian religous authorities tere almsot as effectively as he did against Judaism in General. Christianity was only allowed if it didn't argue, or push the point that Jesus was a nice guy whose ethos was set against the Nazi's. Wikipedia it, and I think there are some interesting articles that describe how Hitler and Goebbels and erm...I can't remember the last guys name... effectively killed Christian worship and replaced it with Naziism during and before the war years.
Funny that he focused so hard on Nords being "Aryan". I can never decide if he was simply delusional there or trying to make the whole thing up...


But Hitler did indeed debase Darwinian evolution by jumping on the phrase "survival of the fittest," which Darwin never actually said or wrote.
Darwin described natural selection as the survival of individuals who were best adapted to an environment leading to a steady increase of those traits which were inherited, whether said traits nevessarily led to suitability for survival or not. In general those favored traits would increase in the population, thus leading to evolution over a long period of time.

The term "best adapted" fits Dawin better than survival of the fittest, which he felt was...too easily turned into a racist argument.

Seangoli, Darwin didn't so much observe lots of things (obviously he did) but he more importantly tied a hundred threads of thought by others into a coherent explanation of evolutionary thought. Which was still missing the idea of Mendalian Genetics, which oddly enough was in a book on Darwin's shelves at the time he went to press he he he!

Herbert Spencer actually coined the term "survival of the fittest," and Darwin only grudgingly accepted it.

and thus endeth the lesson in Nazi History and Anthropological history... sorry to talk so much ;)
Thank you. Not only do you say everything I was going to say when I got around to it, but you prove that not every new poster here is a gun-smilie toting moron, as it often seems. Well done.

Seangoli, Darwin didn't so much observe lots of things (obviously he did) but he more importantly tied a hundred threads of thought by others into a coherent explanation of evolutionary thought. Which was still missing the idea of Mendalian Genetics, which oddly enough was in a book on Darwin's shelves at the time he went to press he he he!


Hrm. Magenta as my color. However very interesting.

Also, quite true. Many people before him toyed and hypothesized on evolution, and he did tie them together, however observation was also key in the formation of his theory.

As for Mendalian Genetics, it's rather odd really. The main reason why Darwin's theory wasn't immediately accepted by the scientific community is because Darwin had no idea of genetics, as no one really did, and there was no "force" that could explain how evolution worked. Not until 30 years later, when Mendal's work was "discovered" did it really get much notice. Kind of funny, especially considered that Mendal had published his work before Darwin published his, and that no one really took notice of Mendal's works at the time.

besides, it made you notiuce your name, right?

As I said, Mendel's work was on Darwin's shelves when he published. Sadly, it didn't really make sense to anybody at the time. They seem to have thought "gee, great, we can make red flowers and white flowers make big round peas that taste bad," and then everybody collectively shelved it for 30 years. And of course Darwin also would never have come to grips with everything without the Beagle as you said.

It's odd-I tutored physical Anthropology for 2 years during my undergrad years. It's only years later that I am coming to really get the amazing amount of thinking and sheer brilliance that led to modern medicine. We wouldn't have ten percent of what we have today without Darwinian thought. I keep demanding that my students who refuse to believe in evolution have no right to go to the doctor, but they oddly enough feel safe in USING Darwinian medicine without actually believeing in it...

thanks all for the kudos everyone. I argue in a few other forums, and am always accused of talking too much. I'll try to reign myself in here ;)

Not to some sects. Some consider Catholicism more or less very evil, and very not Christian. But meh, mere semantic.
You've been reading Jack Chick tracts again, haven't you?
I thought we warned you not to! Those things will melt the higher-level reasoning areas of your brain.

besides, it made you notiuce your name, right?

As I said, Mendel's work was on Darwin's shelves when he published. Sadly, it didn't really make sense to anybody at the time. They seem to have thought "gee, great, we can make red flowers and white flowers make big round peas that taste bad," and then everybody collectively shelved it for 30 years. And of course Darwin also would never have come to grips with everything without the Beagle as you said.

It's odd-I tutored physical Anthropology for 2 years during my undergrad years. It's only years later that I am coming to really get the amazing amount of thinking and sheer brilliance that led to modern medicine. We wouldn't have ten percent of what we have today without Darwinian thought. I keep demanding that my students who refuse to believe in evolution have no right to go to the doctor, but they oddly enough feel safe in USING Darwinian medicine without actually believeing in it...

thanks all for the kudos everyone. I argue in a few other forums, and am always accused of talking too much. I'll try to reign myself in here ;)

True, I did notice my name there. Nobody has really use Magenta with my name though... rather disconcerting.

You were in Physical Anthro? Oddly enough, I'm considering declaring Anthro as my major pretty soon, but haven't decided as I have no idea right now what I could do with such a major. Meeting with the department head pretty soon.

Also, you will never be accused of that here. However, I have found that if your points are not kept to less than a half mile long, they will largely go ignored. At least, that's the way it works for me. Or maybe it's the smell... penetrating through the internet... with magical fungal odorization... of mythical proportions...

You've been reading Jack Chick tracts again, haven't you?
I thought we warned you not to! Those things will melt the higher-level reasoning areas of your brain.

Damn, I had to look him up. We used to get those bloody pamphlets in the bathrooms at work all the freaking time. Massive amounts of bull. For instance, the one on evolution was the most horrible piece of misguided, misinformed, and ignorant pieces of literature I have ever seen. I also "love" they way he depicted the "Evolutionist" as being a fat, ugly, unkept man, and the "Good Christian" as a young, vibrant, good-looking(almost Hitler's Aryan type), well kept man. No bias at all. This booklet was actually brought into one of my Archaeology classes, and my professor addressed and beat down every single point in the book(The kid got pissed and walked out of class half way through).

Needless to say, the first few were a good laugh. Until I realized these people were serious. And I swear I do not know how the booklets ended up in the toilet.

Really was quite insulting, though, finding his obviously anti-Catholic garbage about, although I wasn't Catholic at the time, I am of Catholic heritage(Gave it up years ago), and I have a great deal more respect for Catholicism than some other sects and mini-sects, as at least the Catholics are trying to be respectful.

http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/experts.asp?ID=crm&ec=I1301

Despite the misinformation on the site, what I find most amusing is that, except for Coulter, they are all white males.

Couldn't find even one token-black-guy? I think these guys might be into eugenics...they are obviously weeding out diversity. :p

You're using "except" incorrectly. "Except" refers to things that are exceptions.

Well, the theory of evolution lent credibility and a scientific background to Hitlers racist beliefs, that much is right. But making the nazi link is just low. A lot of that going on these days.
Ann Coulter? Isn't that the crazy lady? Why would they want her in the documentary, isn't she a "journalist"?

Ann Coulter? Isn't that the crazy lady? Why would they want her in the documentary, isn't she a "journalist"?

Nope, she has nothing but contempt for the journalistic endeavors, mainly because she can make money off rants against the 'liberal media'.

Go figure.

Well, the theory of evolution lent credibility and a scientific background to Hitlers racist beliefs, that much is right. But making the nazi link is just low. A lot of that going on these days.
Ann Coulter? Isn't that the crazy lady? Why would they want her in the documentary, isn't she a "journalist"?

Ann Coulter is a "conservative" pundit who makes money off ranting about "liberals" in the United States. Note the quotation marks, placed intentionally due to the fact that in the U.S., all the two terms ever mean anymore are Democrat and Republican. I use the international definition, but seeing as how Ann Coulter would never be smart enough to apply such a thing...

Hitler interpreted Darwinism about as well as he interpreted Christianity's, seeing how he considered himself both a Darwinist and Christian.

I read just a few hours ago that the guy in charge of the holocaust carried a copy of the Bhagavad Gita in his pocket at all times. made me sad...I like the Bhagavad Gita - but it was "aryan" (which is debatable in the first place) so he thought it was nazi, too. boo to nazis.

and world-domination plots + genocide are not new. hitler's little go at it was just the most recent and most televised. it's not unique in any respect, ideologically and politically speaking.

Damn, I had to look him up. We used to get those bloody pamphlets in the bathrooms at work all the freaking time. Massive amounts of bull.

oh my GOD - those things piss me the fuck off. I saw one in which he had the virgin mary bowing to satan. people like him are responsible for no end of violence and hatred - ugh.

Hitler wasn't Christian, I heard he threw them into death camps along with Jews. Plus having seen many documentaries on WII and Hitler he was indeed an ocultist.That must be why Mein Kampf is full of references to the church, how much he (Literally) adored it, respected it, countless references to God (Again, respectful, faithful references) and so on...

And for someone who allegedly 'Hated Christians', he sure as hell had a lot of 'em within the inner circle of the Reich (Göbbels, Göring, you name it).

The issue wasn't with Christianity - he was a Christian himself, after all.

The issue was with Christians who disagreed with him.

And that's no different from his treatment of germans/ aryans who happened to disagree with him.

Yet, nobody's going to say that Hitler wasn't, well... Racist, just because he happened to order the death of a few of his own, designated 'Master Race', no?

The same reasoning applies to religious issues concerning him.

Hitler wasn't Christian, I heard he threw them into death camps along with Jews. Plus having seen many documentaries on WII and Hitler he was indeed an ocultist.

erm, occultism is not remotely against christianity. St. Clement of Alexandria, a father of the christian church, refers to the Corpus Hermetica and it's mythical author, Hermes Trismegistus, as having been divinely inspired. The Hermetica is the seminal work of western occultism.

somebody should argue hitler wasn't a christian because he doesn't adhere to christian ethical standards. then I'd have to point out that the number of christians who actually follow the commands of christ (even if we just stick to the sermon on the mount) approach 0. I had a "christian" once explain to me that "going the extra mile" was actually christ's jewish-nationalist way of getting roman soldiers in trouble. technically if you've ever refused a homeless person - or even given them less than twice what they asked for, you are not following christ's commands. if you've ever responded to being attacked in any way but by passively inviting another attack and offering no resistance, then you are not following christ's commands. hitler is as much a christian as most "christians" are - in that both he and 99.9% of christians completely ignore anything they find inconvienient about the teachings of christ.

The gross misrepresentation of Charles Darwin aside, wouldn't blaming him for the actions of Hitler be sort of like blaming Jesus for something like the Crusades?

The gross misrepresentation of Charles Darwin aside, wouldn't blaming him for the actions of Hitler be sort of like blaming Jesus for something like the Crusades?

I think its even worse than that as Darwin wasn't really suggesting any sort of moral code.. he was just trying to explain the things he saw all around him.

I think the analogy of Ben Franklin being blamed for the electric chair was not a bad one... thanks The Tribes Of Longton

There wasn't much of a suggestion of purpose to Darwins work.. just curiosity... well as far as I understood it. He was a failed priest.. but still..

The gross misrepresentation of Charles Darwin aside, wouldn't blaming him for the actions of Hitler be sort of like blaming Jesus for something like the Crusades?That's funny. While Jesus invented the ideology that led to the crusades Darwin only tried to describe what's out there. Evolution is a process in nature and not something Darwin invented.

failed priest.. are there others?

Hitler interpreted Darwinism about as well as he interpreted Christianity's, seeing how he considered himself both a Darwinist and Christian.

Hitler was not a christian. As Martin Bormann, Hitler's private secretary stated "National Socialism and Christanity are irreconcilable".

How can a man who undermined and attempted to remove the christian influence and teachings from German society a Christian?

the funny thing is that darwin didnt belief in social darwinism.
anyone who doesnt belief in evolution shouldnt be allowed to vote. or be out in public, or use the internet. in fact what i think would be productive, and help human evolution(;) ) is that we should round up creationists and put them into camps of increased attention.

you how life start? the single cell thing that then formed a colony of single celled organisms before form a multicelled organism? they found the one humans came from at the bottom of a sea somewhere really feckin deep.

I think its even worse than that as Darwin wasn't really suggesting any sort of moral code.

no it does. work out whats productive for society, and do that.

no it does. work out whats productive for society, and do that.

Social Darwinism might, but as someone's already said, the idea of Social Darwinism predates Darwin.

darwin would be one of the first persons to wright down why it is correct.

darwin would be one of the first persons to wright down why it is correct.

Oh, you knew him personally?

Oh, you knew him personally?

i did actually, funny story i'll start a topic about later.

in history ahs there been anyone else tried to explain evolution in the same maner? besides that huxley chap.

erm, occultism is not remotely against christianity. St. Clement of Alexandria, a father of the christian church, refers to the Corpus Hermetica and it's mythical author, Hermes Trismegistus, as having been divinely inspired. The Hermetica is the seminal work of western occultism.

somebody should argue hitler wasn't a christian because he doesn't adhere to christian ethical standards. then I'd have to point out that the number of christians who actually follow the commands of christ (even if we just stick to the sermon on the mount) approach 0. I had a "christian" once explain to me that "going the extra mile" was actually christ's jewish-nationalist way of getting roman soldiers in trouble. technically if you've ever refused a homeless person - or even given them less than twice what they asked for, you are not following christ's commands. if you've ever responded to being attacked in any way but by passively inviting another attack and offering no resistance, then you are not following christ's commands. hitler is as much a christian as most "christians" are - in that both he and 99.9% of christians completely ignore anything they find inconvienient about the teachings of christ.

Hitler wasn't a Christian because he felt that Christianity was against the beliefs of his party. In fact he tried to remove the influence of religion from Germany....if he was a Christain, why would he want to remove its teachings from German politics and education?

erm, occultism is not remotely against christianity. St. Clement of Alexandria, a father of the christian church, refers to the Corpus Hermetica and it's mythical author, Hermes Trismegistus, as having been divinely inspired. The Hermetica is the seminal work of western occultism.


Yes, if I remember correctly Trismegistus' work was important in christian mysticism during the Medieval and Renaissance periods as was Khabalah(sp) although that recieved a bit more of a mixed response from some figures. It was also important in the "science" of the time, I'm wanting to say biology, but the works of Aristotle and Galian(sp) on humors were the main basis for that so I'm thinking it was probably alchemy. Thats all from memory so I might be mixing a few things.

Again, let's reemphisize that Hitler was not a Christian. He was also not really an occultist of the dark and scary kind. Say rather that he was willing to try anything that might give him an advantage. He intended to rebuildGermany without any religion at all, and intended to dismantle all of the churches. You might remember that Mein Kamph replaced the bible on all alters. That should explain quite well how he felt about Christianity. There was also a concerted effort to dismantle the Catholic Church, and to break the will of any protestants who defied him by putting them in concentration camps.

HItler was far more interested in building an entirely new vision of what a German was, by calling it an Aryan and combining bits and pieces of different stroies and religions and political and artistic leanings into a "Nazi Faith" which all centered on the works of Wagner. Hitler treated Wagner as...well, lets say he was somewhat obsessed with him and after that treated his family as if they were Mary and Joseph...as it were. There is a lot more to this story than the History CHannel's crappy "documentaries" and to claim that Hitler was a Christian is just plain false. He may have been a german in a CHristian Nation, but he never had any intention of allowing CHristiantity to survive the 3rd Reich's takeover of the world.

Social Darwinism might, but as someone's already said, the idea of Social Darwinism predates Darwin.

And it exists in Christianity in the lovely form of the "Prosperity Gospel".

Remember, according to them if you're poor God doesn't love you, and rampant greed is a sign of God's favor.

no it does. work out whats productive for society, and do that.

that doesn't really hold any moral value since it doesn't define what is productive for society. communists would say social equality while neo-liberals would say economic freedom.


'darwin for the left' (http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/article_details.php?id=4147) is a very interesting essay on this topic.

Hitler was not a christian. As Martin Bormann, Hitler's private secretary stated "National Socialism and Christanity are irreconcilable".

How can a man who undermined and attempted to remove the christian influence and teachings from German society a Christian?

To you/everyone who quoted me and said he wasn't a christian because he didn't act a certain way....

No shit, that was the point of my statement. Try reading the whole thing, I'm saying hes as much a "Christian" as a "darwinist"

As in he was neither.

"Spend money and you too can become enlightened!"

Ah, the way religion is perverted to make money...so typical of humanity...

Yeah. Wish I could get in on that scam. @$#%'ing scruples. :mad:

Hitler was not a christian. As Martin Bormann, Hitler's private secretary stated "National Socialism and Christanity are irreconcilable".

How can a man who undermined and attempted to remove the christian influence and teachings from German society a Christian?

George Bush, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson don't seem to have much trouble doing it.

You might remember that Mein Kamph replaced the bible on all alters.Errrr.... Whatever your source is...

Change it.

HItler was far more interested in building an entirely new vision of what a German was, by calling it an Aryan and combining bits and pieces of different stroies and religions and political and artistic leanings into a "Nazi Faith" which all centered on the works of Wagner.ROFL.

On a more serious note...

Please. Please change it.

and to claim that Hitler was a Christian is just plain false. He may have been a german in a CHristian Nation, but he never had any intention of allowing CHristiantity to survive the 3rd Reich's takeover of the world.Again, this must be why he referred god approximately every five minutes in his speeches and in Mein Kampf.

You might not agree with Hitler's form of (Christian) faith, but saying that he didn't have it is delusional.

Hell. Historically, he's rather closer to Christianity than the average modern 'Bla Bla peace & understanding' kind. You are familiar with the crusades, Alexander the sixth, and other such things, yes?

Have not checked the references but it seems Hitler referred rather more to himself doing God's work than to Darwin's.

http://ffrf.org/fttoday/1997/march97/holocaust.html

George Bush, Jerry Falwell, and Pat Robertson don't seem to have much trouble doing it.

But the Republicans are mostly a christian party....the nazi's were not, they were as religious as the Bolsheviks were in Russia.

Again, this must be why he referred god approximately every five minutes in his speeches and in Mein Kampf.

You might not agree with Hitler's form of (Christian) faith, but saying that he didn't have it is delusional.

Hell. Historically, he's rather closer to Christianity than the average modern 'Bla Bla peace & understanding' kind. You are familiar with the crusades, Alexander the sixth, and other such things, yes?

So his undermining of the Christian churches in Germany makes him a Christian? Also the fact that religion is mentioned in his speeches does not mean a thing. George w. Bush said there were WMD's in Iraq in his speeches - does that mean he was correct? No it does not. Hitler was just saying what the religious in Germany wanted to hear, not what he believed in.

To you/everyone who quoted me and said he wasn't a christian because he didn't act a certain way....

No shit, that was the point of my statement. Try reading the whole thing, I'm saying hes as much a "Christian" as a "darwinist"

As in he was neither.

Sorry I must have understood your post. Hitler was neither a Darwinist or a Christian. The only thing he belived in was his own power and the myth of invincibility that surrounded him in the propaganda that was fed to Germans at the time.

So his undermining of the Christian churches in Germany makes him a Christian?Being christian != agreeing with the church. I mentioned the example before - Hitler also went quite determinedly against 'Aryans' that happened to disagree with him. Applying your logic, this would mean that he wasn't a racist (Or a white supremacist, if you prefer).

And, well... It doesn't quite work that way. You'll notice that the higher echelons of the NSDAP were full of quite faithful christians - you'll also notice the absence of jews in these same echelons. Quite obviously, Hitler had a problem with one of these groups, but not with the other.

Being christian != agreeing with the church. I mentioned the example before - Hitler also went quite determinedly against 'Aryans' that happened to disagree with him. Applying your logic, this would mean that he wasn't a racist (Or a white supremacist, if you prefer).

And, well... It doesn't quite work that way. You'll notice that the higher echelons of the NSDAP were full of quite faithful christians - you'll also notice the absence of jews in these same echelons. Quite obviously, Hitler had a problem with one of these groups, but not with the other.

I would like to see what your list of Christain Nazi's is.

Errrr.... Whatever your source is...

Change it.

ROFL.

On a more serious note...

Please. Please change it.

Again, this must be why he referred god approximately every five minutes in his speeches and in Mein Kampf.

You might not agree with Hitler's form of (Christian) faith, but saying that he didn't have it is delusional.

Hell. Historically, he's rather closer to Christianity than the average modern 'Bla Bla peace & understanding' kind. You are familiar with the crusades, Alexander the sixth, and other such things, yes?


It amazes me that people are dumb enough to challenge basic facts that can be found in any text referencing the National Reich's Church of Germany. If you must have a source cited, try the Encyclopedia of the 3rd Reich. Or try the Life and Times of Adolph Hitler or The Rise and Fall of the Third REich by William Shirer. Any number of well accepted histories describe how Hitler built a Nazi Church and made Mein Kamph it's bible.
But before you do that, I suggest you actually engage your brain before you mouth off again. It only makes you sound stupid when you make fun of someone on a subject you don't know very much about, eh?:rolleyes:

You obviously don't know very much about Hitler, the 3rd REich, Mein Kamph, or Nazism, so it's sort of funny that you make such strong arguments about any of them. Yes, there were Nazi's who were Christians. But you see, they weren't Hitler. Hitler was in fact against Christianity because he considered it just another branch of Judaism. He also though accultism was for idiots, but that the basic themes of the old Norse Mythology and particulalry Wagner's portrayal of them was a fantastic way of selling the Nazi IMAGE. He had no religion really, beyond his own egotism. I'd say that if he ever deided to actually claim there was a god, he was going to be it. Yes, the Christian church survived Hitler's life and death. Yes, his Riech CHurch didn't do very well. Yes, he used the word God repeatedly, much like George W Bush does. Using the word God is a great way to get the masses motivated. But no, he wasn't a christian any more than say...the Ayatolla Khomeni was.

Did anyone look at the panel of 'experts'?
More importantly, did you look at Ian Taylor:
http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/images/experts/img-itaylor.jpg
What the hell is wrong with him? It looks like someone's photoshopped his face!
No way can that be real.

Hehehe...."I'm gonna photoshop your face!" How threatening...I have to use that.

It amazes me that people are dumb enough to challenge basic facts that can be found in any text referencing the National Reich's Church of Germany. If you must have a source cited, try the Encyclopedia of the 3rd Reich. Or try the Life and Times of Adolph Hitler or The Rise and Fall of the Third REich by William Shirer. Any number of well accepted histories describe how Hitler built a Nazi Church and made Mein Kamph it's bible.
But before you do that, I suggest you actually engage your brain before you mouth off again. It only makes you sound stupid when you make fun of someone on a subject you don't know very much about, eh?:rolleyes:

You obviously don't know very much about Hitler, the 3rd REich, Mein Kamph, or Nazism, so it's sort of funny that you make such strong arguments about any of them. Yes, there were Nazi's who were Christians. But you see, they weren't Hitler. Hitler was in fact against Christianity because he considered it just another branch of Judaism. He also though accultism was for idiots, but that the basic themes of the old Norse Mythology and particulalry Wagner's portrayal of them was a fantastic way of selling the Nazi IMAGE. He had no religion really, beyond his own egotism. I'd say that if he ever deided to actually claim there was a god, he was going to be it. Yes, the Christian church survived Hitler's life and death. Yes, his Riech CHurch didn't do very well. Yes, he used the word God repeatedly, much like George W Bush does. Using the word God is a great way to get the masses motivated. But no, he wasn't a christian any more than say...the Ayatolla Khomeni was.1. Christianity is just another branch of Judaism. If it weren't, the Christian claim of Yeshua being the Messiah would be utterly pointless.
2. Whatever 'church' you claim Hitler was building, it had no success. I don't know any German (nobody in fact) who has ever heard of such an attempt.

Did anyone look at the panel of 'experts'?
More importantly, did you look at Ian Taylor:
http://www.coralridge.org/darwin/images/experts/img-itaylor.jpg
What the hell is wrong with him? It looks like someone's photoshopped his face!
No way can that be real.Just bad genes.

so you're saying the mounds of documentation that we have as from that period are lying, or that they don't exist? Or could it be that the people you know don't know any more than they knew about the holocaust? Mind, there are plenty who claim they never knew about the jews being murdered, who actually did=they just don't admit it because of course then wthey would be guilty of not trying to stop it.

I'm more willing to believe the documents both from the Reich and plenty of other sorces that cite bith the Reich Church AND that Hitler intended to make Mein Kamph Germany's bible. Aside from the fact that every soldier was given one, and every married couple, it was by far the most popular book in the country--waaay over sales of the bible up to that date, especially considering Hitler banned (breifly I believe) the sale and printing of bibles--he hehe

I'll stand by my degree and reality thank you.


here. And easy if not particularly enligtening wikipedia page about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reich_Church


Mind, this church never really got off the ground because it was among the crappier of hitler's ideas, my my point has been that he wanted it, tried it and in fact did it. That it didn't work has never been a subject of debate, simply that it existed and my opinions about Adolph and his religious veiws are correct. If we must go round the merry go round, keep in mind that my first degree was in History (WWII concentration because it was easy lol)
Hitler was NOT a chirstian, he was NOT an occultist, and he DID NOT want a Christian church in Germany.Must I throw out twnety more sources backing me up or can we move on?

I would like to see what your list of Christain Nazi's is.I already listed a few (Reading's a blessing, isn't it?) - Göbbels, Göring, Hess, to name a few of the ones in the highest echelons of the party.

Naturally, there's loads in the lower echelons, too - some even wrote books. Reinhard Spitzy ('So haben wir das Reich verspielt') comes to mind - again, perfectly catholic.

It amazes me that people are dumb enough to challenge basic facts that can be found in any text referencing the National Reich's Church of Germany. If you must have a source cited, try the Encyclopedia of the 3rd Reich. Or try the Life and Times of Adolph Hitler or The Rise and Fall of the Third REich by William Shirer. Any number of well accepted histories describe how Hitler built a Nazi Church and made Mein Kamph it's bibleAll of which use mere hearsay as a source, particularly Bormann, who attempted to contradict the assessments of the entire rest of the party, including all of the people I mentioned above, and who couldn't provide a single written note of Hitler that'd state that he was anti-christian.

On the other hand, anything Hitler's ever written is full of references to god, the church, the glory of catholicism. The SS referred god in its oath.

And so on.

And, well... Personally, I consider texts that are evidently written by whomever one's discussing to be somewhat more believable than 'Private Conversations' of which no recordings exist, and which could quite easily have been made up to be somewhat more compelling evidence than the latter.

Also, it's rather hilarious that someone who claims that Mein Kampf replaced the bible on the altars of the churches suggests that I'm stupid.

Again, whoever told you this must've had his brain surgically removed.

Seriously. Claiming that Hitler was 'Anti-Christian' because he happened to disagree with a church that'd occasionally disagree with him, and eventually tried to found his own, is rather like saying that Martin Luther had no faith - he, too, happened to disagree with the power of the catholic church, and he, too, organised a splitaway (Rather more successful than Hitler) - Clearly Martin Luther was a faithless atheist!

I'm sure you see the problem here? Well, actually, I'm not, but...

Incidentally, I'm curious. What is your definition of 'Christian'? Seeing as you're so strongly fighting for the idea that Hitler wasn't was one... Yeah. Curious.

so you're saying the mounds of documentation that we have as from that period are lyingOf course not. Mein Kampf most certainly isn't lying.

You're the one who ignores all the actual documents of the time in favour of (Church-lobbied) post-war era 'Assessments' which quietly ignore everything Hitler's ever publicly said - and, more importantly, written - about religion and christianity at large, my dear friend.

I'm more willing to believe the documents both from the Reich and plenty of other sorces that cite bith the Reich Church AND that Hitler intended to make Mein Kamph Germany's bible.This documents being? 'Mein Kampf replacing the Bible' is just about the stupidest claim I've ever heard - to be perfectly frank, it sounds rather like the phrases of a ten-year old with comprehension issues after he (Or she) has just watched a documentary on TV.

especially considering Hitler banned (breifly I believe) the sale and printing of bibles--he heheAha. Ahahahahahahaha. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

You're funny.

I'm very sorry, but... No. I simply can't take this seriously.

*Goes back to giggling*

here. And easy if not particularly enligtening wikipedia page about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reich_ChurchSooo... Because he hated christians and christianity, he eventually founded a christian church?

Somehow, I'm missing the 'Jewish Reich Synaggue' in here, which should rather be expected to exist, if your 'Logic' actually applied.

If we must go round the merry go round, keep in mind that my first degree was in History (WWII concentration because it was easy lol)For once, I agree with you - that course must've been hilariously easy.

I already listed a few (Reading's a blessing, isn't it?) - Göbbels, Göring, Hess, to name a few of the ones in the highest echelons of the party.

Naturally, there's loads in the lower echelons, too - some even wrote books. Reinhard Spitzy ('So haben wir das Reich verspielt') comes to mind - again, perfectly catholic.

All of which use mere hearsay as a source, particularly Bormann, who attempted to contradict the assessments of the entire rest of the party, including all of the people I mentioned above, and who couldn't provide a single written note of Hitler that'd state that he was anti-christian.

On the other hand, anything Hitler's ever written is full of references to god, the church, the glory of catholicism. The SS referred god in its oath.

And so on.

And, well... Personally, I consider texts that are evidently written by whomever one's discussing to be somewhat more believable than 'Private Conversations' of which no recordings exist, and which could quite easily have been made up to be somewhat more compelling evidence than the latter.

Also, it's rather hilarious that someone who claims that Mein Kampf replaced the bible on the altars of the churches suggests that I'm stupid.

Again, whoever told you this must've had his brain surgically removed.

Seriously. Claiming that Hitler was 'Anti-Christian' because he happened to disagree with a church that'd occasionally disagree with him, and eventually tried to found his own, is rather like saying that Martin Luther had no faith - he, too, happened to disagree with the power of the catholic church, and he, too, organised a splitaway (Rather more successful than Hitler) - Clearly Martin Luther was a faithless atheist!

I'm sure you see the problem here? Well, actually, I'm not, but...

Incidentally, I'm curious. What is your definition of 'Christian'? Seeing as you're so strongly fighting for the idea that Hitler wasn't was one... Yeah. Curious.

Of course not. Mein Kampf most certainly isn't lying.

You're the one who ignores all the actual documents of the time in favour of (Church-lobbied) post-war era 'Assessments' which quietly ignore everything Hitler's ever publicly said - and, more importantly, written - about religion and christianity at large, my dear friend.

This documents being? 'Mein Kampf replacing the Bible' is just about the stupidest claim I've ever heard - to be perfectly frank, it sounds rather like the phrases of a ten-year old with comprehension issues after he (Or she) has just watched a documentary on TV.

Aha. Ahahahahahahaha. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

You're funny.

I'm very sorry, but... No. I simply can't take this seriously.

*Goes back to giggling*

Sooo... Because he hated christians and christianity, he eventually founded a christian church?

Somehow, I'm missing the 'Jewish Reich Synaggue' in here, which should rather be expected to exist, if your 'Logic' actually applied.

For once, I agree with you - that course must've been hilariously easy.


riiiight. So all the work I did on my senior thesis--using first hand evidence I collected while stationed in Berlin, and using first hand interviews of the few protestant leaders still alive fromthat period--that's all bunk is it? Go suck a lemon kid. You're playing in the big leagues now. The bible did indeed "Officially" replace bibbles on alters after the ReichChurch was founded. Lasted what, three weeks or so before the church itslef decided this was too far and changed it despite Hitler's wishes. If you don't know anything about a Reich Church, whyn't you actually look for it before you make a further ass of yourself, eh?

I aten't sayin that said church actually meant anything, but there is plenty of documentation that says I am rightm and you are being stupid. That you refuse to actually believe any of it says more about you than it does about the material, including written orders published by the Reich concerning the church and plenty of (omigod actual first hand evidence) of bills, correspondance, official complaint, record of church leaders being incarcerated and murdered...the list of positive confirmation goes on and on and on...and so do you. So I'll just let you wobble off and say good night, mein leibesling.

As for claiming that my history course was easy, well, it was. I was stationed where it happened. so of course collecting information was easier for me than say, Geroge Schmaltz of NYC... I don't speak German which was a bitch, but I worked intelligence and so had plenty of interpreters. WHo were as shocked and surprised as YOU to find that hitler founded a church whcih absorbed all the other churches in Germany, and which quickly died a quiet death. But there now, it will be all right. Your lack of...ability to restrain your insulting tone and general ignorance af a sort of esoteric subject isn't really a failing. I just sort of wish you would shut the hell up so I can go to sleep :)

Somehow, I'm missing the 'Jewish Reich Synaggue' in here, which should rather be expected to exist, if your 'Logic' actually applied.

.
truly. truly the thing you should be most embarassed about saying. I mean, your humor isn't even funny. If you can't come up with better, well, go find subject you know anything about.

Hitler is hard to understand...... He believed in superiority of the the Aryan race, but made an alliance with the japanese.... He hero-worshiped the British empire in Mein Kampf but supported a Free india movement.
He hated jews, but he was saved by a Hungarian jew at the Munich pustic.
He had the support of the pope, but promoted a pagan religion (the german faith movement) and practiced Darwinism. He was sure random.....

Hitler is hard to understand...... He believed in superiority of the the Aryan race, but made an alliance with the japanese.... He hero-worshiped the British empire in Mein Kampf but supported a Free india movement.
He hated jews, but he was saved by a Hungarian jew at the Munich pustic.
He had the support of the pope, but promoted a pagan religion (the german faith movement) and practiced Darwinism. He was sure random.....
well, you have to remember that the pope was in the middleof Italy...he wasn't eactly in a good place to argue now was he?

not random, i think, just...opportunistic as hell.

so you're saying the mounds of documentation that we have as from that period are lying, or that they don't exist? Or could it be that the people you know don't know any more than they knew about the holocaust? Mind, there are plenty who claim they never knew about the jews being murdered, who actually did=they just don't admit it because of course then wthey would be guilty of not trying to stop it.

I'm more willing to believe the documents both from the Reich and plenty of other sorces that cite bith the Reich Church AND that Hitler intended to make Mein Kamph Germany's bible. Aside from the fact that every soldier was given one, and every married couple, it was by far the most popular book in the country--waaay over sales of the bible up to that date, especially considering Hitler banned (breifly I believe) the sale and printing of bibles--he hehe

I'll stand by my degree and reality thank you.


here. And easy if not particularly enligtening wikipedia page about it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_Reich_Church


Mind, this church never really got off the ground because it was among the crappier of hitler's ideas, my my point has been that he wanted it, tried it and in fact did it. That it didn't work has never been a subject of debate, simply that it existed and my opinions about Adolph and his religious veiws are correct. If we must go round the merry go round, keep in mind that my first degree was in History (WWII concentration because it was easy lol)
Hitler was NOT a chirstian, he was NOT an occultist, and he DID NOT want a Christian church in Germany.Must I throw out twnety more sources backing me up or can we move on?I don't care what you believe in. There was never any chance or attempt of getting the Germans (especially any Catholics) to abandon their Churches for the crap you claim to have sources for.
And learn to spell, please.

never said there was. SImply that Hitler wasn't a CHirstian--that he wanted to dismantle the christian churches and tried. And I do know how to spell, i usually edit my work after I type it, and sometimes don't bother. Sorry if it bugs you.

never said there was. SImply that Hitler wasn't a CHirstian--that he wanted to dismantle the christian churches and tried. And I do know how to spell, i usually edit my work after I type it, and sometimes don't bother. Sorry if it bugs you.
What's Hitler's name and the title of his writing?

What's Hitler's name and the title of his writing?

Adolf Hitler is is full name and his book is "Mein Kamph" which is german meaning, my kamph. :)

Adolf Hitler is is full name and his book is "Mein Kamph" which is german meaning, my kamph. :)Yes, Adolf and 'Mein Kampf', dear Lunatic Goophballs

Yes, Adolf and 'Mein Kampf', dear Lunatic Goophballs

:eek:

Well, Phuck me! :eek:

am I doing that again? I actually had a problem with it yers ago--I somehow got my spellcheck to register Kamph as proper and it stuck--which was of course bad considering I was writing papers on it and suchlike. And if I look back it's entirely possible I have mispelled Adolf as well, it being like 4am here and me having insomnia and the ph being stuck in my head. Doesn't make my comments any less true, just means I got brain stuck. And of course as a very EX journalist right outta DINFOS I am sure you want me to cut my wrists and go crying off into the night. Not gonna happen tho. I will apologize and issue an editorial sometime or other, but it's 7 am now and I still can't sleep, which I guess means I need to go running and get ready for the day :rolleyes:

oh hel;l I really got it bad. Kampf? wtf? AND Kampph...i need to get off the intrynet for the day.

I already listed a few (Reading's a blessing, isn't it?) - Göbbels, Göring, Hess, to name a few of the ones in the highest echelons of the party.

Naturally, there's loads in the lower echelons, too - some even wrote books. Reinhard Spitzy ('So haben wir das Reich verspielt') comes to mind - again, perfectly catholic.



Goebbels renounced the Christain faith in his adolesence. Also, because a person is born into a particular religion it does not mean they believed in it.
I doubt any were strong Christians and if they were they obviously hid it well by joining an anti - religious political party.