Duh. Of course.
Hitler on the Origins of Religion:
- Thread starter Carcano
- Start date
Duh. Of course.
That doesn't answer my question. Why do they need to be in German for there to be a serious discussion? What's wrong with the English translation?
Ah, I seemed to have missed that.
So what is your point? Are you attempting to imply that his horrible acts are directly related to his atheism? Because if you are, you could also attribute the acts to his being male, Austrian, or having a tiny mustache.
And how would it be bad news for self-proclaimed ex-catholic atheists on the board. Did Hitler promise to come back from the dead and kill them all? Again, explain yourself and, please, back up your claims while at it.
Some people, with and without faith, commit horrible atrocities. Are we to hold their spiritual beliefs or lack thereof to blame for their actions? If that is the case then we have to blame religions for many atrocities throughout history. Or perhaps you can avoid making such bigoted judgements and attribute horrible acts to mental illness and acknowledging that one's spiritual beliefs or lack thereof are merely a tiny piece in a gigantic puzzle of their mind.
If only it were true that religious belief was less than the motive for and lubricant of hatred and violence, then you'd really be on to something.
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Hitler considered the Roman Emperor Constantine to be the greatest traitor in European history. Not for personally accepting Christianity, but for officially promoting it. A religion that was not only foreign to aryan Europe, but also self-mortifying.
Its the 'self-mortifying' part which led to the later 'destruction from within' of the empire, in his opinion.
I believe he saw his own life as an great act of restoration...the restoration of European cultural integrity, as described in Nietzsche's little book called 'The Antichrist' published in 1895.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Antichrist_(book)
Last edited:
Carcano
Valued Senior Member
Its a state predominated by theta and delta brain wave activity...accept that one is fully awake and conscious.
I've always found it amusing how atheists pretend that having a social/political agenda (and therefore the potential to screw up wholesale) is the exclusive property of theists (and that any apparent wrong doing of an apparent atheist is a consequence of their moustache or ethnicity or some other aspect)
Did you read what it was a response to?
If being raised a catholic is sufficient to suspend any identification with atheism then many self proclaimed atheists on this site have severe issues ....
:shrug:
I find it amusing when ANYONE of ANY particular background makes a generalized statement about a huge group of people who do not display with consistency identical behaviors or view. All atheists consistently show themselves to share one and only one common trait with each other. They do not believe in any god. Theists consistently show themselves to share one and only one trait with one another. They believe in a god.
All other behaviors and beliefs are unique to the individuals. Yes subgroups within the umbrella label may hold more traits in common with each other but the terms ATHEIST and THEIST are too broad in spectrum to assert that a person claiming one of these labels MUST therefore behave a certain way.
I am an atheist. I do not hold the religious doctrine of a criminal accountable for the crimes committed by the one who committed them. It is more likely that the criminal would use his or her religion to justify their crime if religion was the driving motivation. However there are many theists in prison today. Many who admit their guilt even. But I would bet many of them will say their faith in no way justifies their crimes. The ones who do claim it, often are put in the prisons specifically designed for the criminally insane.
At no point did I say that Hitler's actions were caused by his mustache or anything physical about him, nor his religion or lack thereof. In case you misunderstood my post, allow me to clarify. I personally believe Hitler did what he did because he was insane.
Henry the VIII was Christian. Like any other king of the time, he was believed to be ordained by God. Ordained meaning chosen. Unless one believes that God chooses someone for a duty then does not guide them in how to perform it we have to assume that even Henry VIII believed God spoke to him. How many of his wives for reasons such as failing to produce a son, did he murder? I do not believe Christianity condones that behavior. Maybe, Henry VIII's interpretation of it and his position of power allowed him the arrogance to feel justified that if he wanted it, then so did God. But generally in our day and age when someone claims that God speaks to them and guides them they are considered insane not only by atheists but by theists as well. David Koresh would be another example. Christianity was not to blame there either. Again, insanity.
To say that religion or lack thereof is to blame for bad behavior is like saying a knife murdered someone. A person can use religion or lack thereof to justify to themselves what they do wrong and therefore use it as a tool to cause harm but that does not make the religion itself or lack thereof bad.
Any doctrine, religious or political, when used to unjustly harm others can appear to be bad.
I did read it but I did not understand exactly what you were implying. That is the problem with implications, if you don't say outright what it is you are wanting to convey, people may not understand it. That is why I asked you to clarify it. I appreciate the clarification. I understand where you are coming from now. You hold a presumption that atheists worry about being associated with their past affiliations. I am sure some do. But not all. In fact I was raised Baptist, switched denominations several times and at one time converted to Islam, then spent some time being vaguely pagan (pagan is another broadly defined group) before finally finding peace of mind when I reached the conclusion that there is no god at all.
I am not ashamed of my past. I feel it gives me a better understanding of people and how we interact with our own thoughts and with each other. Psychology has always fascinated me, though I missed my opportunity to pursue it in formal education.
Oh.
Yes.
Otherwise, we have to posit that human actions (atrocious or not) have no connection with what a person believes or doesn't believe; in which case, we might just as well posit that human action occurs by accident or is determined by a power outside of humans.
Have you noticed that very few religious people claim to be perfect in their faith?
So the US attacking Iraq etc. was an act of mental illness?
Which is a good reason to think that world leaders shouldn't be influenced by invisible sky daddies.
There's an internet thingie circulating that Hitler was a Christian -
So, more from that link:
"Hitler’s involvement with the Church:
a) Hitler was baptized as Roman Catholic during infancy in Austria.
b) As Hitler approached boyhood he attended a monastery school. (On his way to school young Adolf daily observed a stone arch which was carved with the monastery’s coat of arms bearing a swastika.)
c) Hitler was a communicant and an altar boy in the Catholic Church.
d) As a young man he was confirmed as a “soldier of Christ.” His most ardent goal at the time was to become a priest. Hitler writes of his love for the church and clergy: “I had excellent opportunity to intoxicate myself with the solemn splendor of the brilliant church festivals. As was only natural, the abbot seemed to me, as the village priest had once seemed to my father, the highest and most desirable ideal.” -Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
e) Hitler was NEVER excommunicated nor condemned by his church. Matter of fact the Church felt he was JUST and “avenging for God” in attacking the Jews for they deemed the Semites the killers of Jesus.
f) Hitler, Franco and Mussolini were given VETO power over whom the pope could appoint as a bishop in Germany, Spain and Italy. In turn they surtaxed the Catholics and gave the money to the Vatican. Hitler wrote a speech in which he talks about this alliance, this is an excerpt: “The fact that the Vatican is concluding a treaty with the new Germany means the acknowledgement of the National Socialist state by the Catholic Church. This treaty shows the whole world clearly and unequivocally that the assertion that National Socialism [Nazism] is hostile to religion is a lie.” Adolf Hitler, 22 July 1933, writing to the Nazi Party
Hitler and the Popeg) Hitler worked CLOSELY with Pope Pius in converting Germanic society and supporting the church. The Church absorbed Nazi ideals and preached them as part of their sermons in turn Hitler placed Catholic teachings in public education. This photo depicts Hitler with Archbishop Cesare Orsenigo, the papal nuncio in Berlin. It was taken On April 20, 1939, when Orsenigo celebrated Hitler’s birthday. The celebrations were initiated by Pacelli (Pope Pius XII) and became a tradition.
Each April 20, Cardinal Bertram of Berlin was to send “warmest congratulations to the Fuhrer in the name of the bishops and the dioceses in Germany with “fervent prayers which the Catholics of Germany are sending to heaven on their altars.” (If you would like to know more about the secret dealings of Hitler and the Pope I recommend you get a book titled: Hitler’s Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, by John Cornwell)
h) Due to Hitler’s involvement with the Church he began enacting doctrines of the Church as law. He outlawed all abortion, raged a death war on all homosexuals, and demanded corporal punishment in schools and home. Many times Hitler addressed the church and promised that Germany would implement its teachings: “The National Socialist State professes its allegiance to positive Christianity. It will be its honest endeavor to protect both the great Christian Confessions in their rights, to secure them from interference with their doctrines (Lehren), and in their duties to constitute a harmony with the views and the exigencies of the State of today.” –Adolf Hitler, on 26 June 1934, to Catholic bishops to assure them that he would take action against the new pagan propaganda “Providence has caused me to be Catholic, and I know therefore how to handle this Church.” -Adolf Hitler, reportedly to have said in Berlin in 1936 on the enmity of the Catholic Church to National Socialism"
So:
1. If a person is baptized as an infant into the Catholic Church, they are a Christian.
2. If a person attends monastery school, they are a Christian.
3. If a person is a communicant or altar boy, they are a Christian.
4. If a person is not excommunicated, they are a Christian.
5. If a person works with the Church for any reason, be it political or economical, they are a Christian.
6. If a person's beliefs and values in any way resemble those of Christians, they are a Christian.
Yes, totally convincing reasons for considering someone a member or representative of a religion!
I am sure that if invisible sky daddies exist, nobody can help themselves against being influenced by them.
Good point. It is hard to determine with people who do not claim any organized belief system, such as atheists, but with people who claim to believe in particular established religions few are perfect in their faith. Our personal belief systems often trump the doctrine of whatever label we claim. Since a personal belief system is just that, personal, it is unlikely that any large number of people have identical thought processes. I also do not believe that a personal belief system is always in full control of the individual. We are susceptible to our biological urges and psychological imperfections. Sometimes people will be forced into situations when they have to do something against everything they believe in and then they are forced to come to terms with their actions over time. Some people are not stable in their views or beliefs because they are still unsure of how to interpret the world around them.
So, while I do agree with you that our beliefs usually dictate our actions, I was referring more to established belief systems associated with labels that people claim.
I have. I have never suggested that anyone was perfect in their faith or that anyone claimed to be perfect in their faith. I would be willing to bet, if anyone claimed perfection, they would likely be some lunatic that just committed an atrocity and they would soon find themselves in prison for the criminally insane. They would at least not have very many friends, even among their brethren.
I am in no position to pass judgment on the mental capacities of any political leaders involved in making the decision to go to war. I did not have access to information they had at the time. I also was not part of the intelligence gathering. I have received the same watered down super spun information that the rest of the public has received and I have little faith in the integrity of our news media. I have my opinion about the war but it was based on the same unreliable information everyone else got, so I would not consider it valid for assertions nor relevant to the discussion at hand.
Last edited:
I tell 'em to give me their worst.