(Ed) Hitler's Atheism

[headscratcher4]

Bump...its been two days without a response, is this the end of this discussion?

 

[MRC_Hans]

I guess that despite the limits imposed, JK managed to sort of hijack the thread anyway. Or maybe he is just the only one that really has a differing opinion?

Hans

 

[headscratcher4]

I guess that despite the limits imposed, JK managed to sort of hijack the thread anyway. Or maybe he is just the only one that really has a differing opinion?

Hans

Hans:

I guess you are right...JK seems to be the only one holding his position and he has stopped arguing it, save to restate it and to ignore any facts, opinion or historic interpretation that clouds that conclusion...so I suppose I should let it sink....

 

[thaiboxerken]

We cannot know if Hitler truly believed in "jesus" or not, we only know that he proclaimed to be a christian warrior of god and that he often used references to the christian bible in his speeches. It is apparent, however, that the Nazi's were christian. One does not motivate people to go on a crusade by invoking a deity that the people do not believe in.

 

[Nova Land]

We cannot know if Hitler truly believed in "jesus" or not, we only know that he proclaimed to be a christian warrior of god and that he often used references to the christian bible in his speeches. It is apparent, however, that the Nazi's were christian. One does not motivate people to go on a crusade by invoking a deity that the people do not believe in.

Good point! Regardless of Hitler's own religious beliefs, it seems clear that most of his supporters were religious people and not atheists.

We can break the question down even further:

1. What were Hitler's religious beliefs?

2. What were the religious beliefs of his high-ranking Nazi associates?

3. What were the religious beliefs of active Nazi party members and others who supported Hitler's rise to power?

4. What were the religious beliefs of those in Germany who, while not actively supporting Hitler, did not actively oppose him?

5. What were the religious beliefs of those who actively opposed Hitler's rise to power?

The answer to # 3 would appear to me to be predominantly Christian (both Protestant and Catholic). (I'd say it also would be largely the more conservative/right-wing elements of these religions.)

The answer to # 4 would also appear to me to be predominantly Christian. (I'd say it would be the more moderate/centrist elements of these religions).

Category # 5 is where I'd be inclined to place most German atheists, as well as non-Christians and radical/liberal Christians.

For category # 2, there was some sentiment among the leading Nazis to create a new religion, more in tune with Nazi values, based on the worship of Odin (or Wotan) and warrior gods.

As for category # 1: I disagree that we can't know whether Hitler believed in Jesus or not. I think there is good evidence as to what Hitler believed about Jesus in some of Hitler's recorded after-dinner conversations. I had begun quoting excerpts from some of these earlier in the thread, and think it is worth continuing to look at these, since later ones will bear directly on the question of Jesus.

Which is as good a segue as any into my next post...

 

[Nova Land]

At the very beginning of this thread, I had mentioned as a source of information about Hitler's religious beliefs the "table talks" he conducted in the early 1940s. These are after-dinner conversations among Hitler and his close associates. Hitler's portions were transcribed, and these were later translated and published.

The book in which these appear, Hitler's Table Talk (also published as Hitler's Secret Conversations) was originally published in 1953 and has been reprinted several times since. It is available at many libraries.

There are over 300 conversations recorded in the book. The ones that refer to religion, and thus provide clues to Hitler's own beliefs, appear to me to be: 3, 4, 5, 27, 33, 39, 43, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 75, 76, 100, 105, 143, 148, 152, 153, 160, 163, 184, 187, 190, 233, 236, 248, 275, 287, 304, 308, 326, and 328.

Earlier in this thread I had begun quoting excerpts from these, in the order they appear in the book, so that those who do not have access to the book could read (and comment on) these passages in context. There are many web sites that quote the juicy lines, but sometimes the lines are not quite so dramatic in context, and some of the minor bits that don't get quoted as often may add to the understanding of the remarks as a whole.

While these "table talks" do not appear to support the claim that Hitler was an atheist (at least not as most of us define the word "atheist"), they do support Jedi's stated belief that Hitler was not a Catholic and was not a Christian.

I had quoted from conversations 3, 4, 5, and 39 (accidentally skipping over 27 and 33). The material in # 27 is minor enough that I won't bother bringing it in now, but the paragraph from # 33 is worth quoting:

# 33, 10th October 1941, midday:

Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of human failure.

When I typed in the excerpts from conversation # 39 (which now appears somewhere about the middle of page 2 of this thread) I refrained from highlighting or pulling out the juicy bits, so that others could read it for themselves first. Shortly after that, however, we took a break while considering the idea of a moderated thread. I think it is worth going back to # 39 and looking at some of the things Hitler said in it.

Here are some of the items in it that grabbed my attention.

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

So Hitler was scornful of atheism and believed there were genuine mysteries in the universe that religions answered poorly and atheism simply ignored.

"That's why I've always kept the Party aloof from religious questions. I've thus prevented my Catholic and Protestant supporters from forming groups against one another, and inadvertently knocking each other out with the Bible and the sprinkler. So we never became involved with these Churches' forms of worship."

Many of Hitler's supporters were Christians. This ties in with Hitler's positive references to religion in his public speeches. But Hitler privately indicates, as in this conversation, that he needs these people's support and is just using them, so his public utterances about religion cannot be taken at face value.

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

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

This seems fairly clear that Hitler was not a Christian -- had a great deal of scorn for Christianity.

What's especially interesting here is his praise of science. Hitler's own religious beliefs, then, seem to include almost a worship of "science". Taken out of context, this might sound to some people as if he were an atheist, so it is good to keep in mind he just finished scornfully brushing aside atheism a few paragraphs earlier. Just as different people have very different things in mind when they speak of "God", so different people can have very different things in mind when they speak of "Science", and it would be wise to wait for clarification of just what Hitler means by his use of the word before jumping to conclusions.

(It should be noted that several religions relate their beliefs to science -- Mary Baker Eddy's "Christian Science" and L Ron Hubbard's "Scientology" leap to mind. Likewise, many believers in pseudo-sciences make frequent use of the word "science" in promoting their beliefs. By "science", they often are referring to the technologies that have been developed rather than to the method of discovering truth through experiments and empirical evidence.)

Christianity, of course, has reached the peak of absurdity in this respect. And that's why one day its structure will collapse. Science has already impregnated humanity. Consequently, the more Christianity clings to its dogmas, the quicker it will decline.

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

It seems clear that Hitler had a scornful view of his contemporaries' religious beliefs, brushing them aside as "childish beliefs" What's intriguing is his reference to "higher belief". In other words, while he seems to believe virtually everyone else is a fool who accepts make-believe, he does seem to believe there are better answers that he is privy to and which others may eventually come to accept too.

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

Some of the other Nazis had wanted to replace Christianity (which did not suit the Nazis purposes) with a religion more in tune with their values. Hitler, as he states here, did not agree. He thought Christianity was foolish but thought Odin-worhip to be just as foolish.

A movement like ours mustn't let itself be drawn into metaphysical digressions. It must stick to the spirit of exact science. It's not the Party's function to be a counterfeit for religion.

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

Again, Hitler seems to make a religion out of "science".

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

Here is a brief passage in which Hitler speaks about not wanting to destroy faith in God. (However, his reason for wanting belief in God to continue can be taken in several ways, so it would be wise not to draw conclusions too hastily from this passage alone.)

If at this moment we were to eliminate the religions by force, the people would unanimously beseech us for a new form of worship.

Regardless of Hitler's own religious beliefs, he seemed well aware that the German people upon whom he relied for support were religious.

I envisage the future, therefore, as follows: First of all, to each man his private creed. Superstition shall not lose its rights. The Party is sheltered from the danger of competing with the religions. These latter must simply be forbidden from interfering in future with temporal matters. From the tenderest age, education will be imparted in such a way that each child will know all that is important to the maintenance of the State. As for the men close to me, who, like me, have escaped from the clutches of dogma, I've no reason to fear that the Church will get its hooks on them.

Here again is a passage that might seem to indicate Hitler and his close associates were atheists, if it were not appearing in a conversation in which he also denounces atheism as the way foolish and uneducated people think.

Hitler seems to believe there are answers to the questions religions pose (about how people came to be here and what purpose there is to life) and that these can be found through "Science", but his science may be one that includes the existence of a God. I would recommend suspending judgment on that question until we examine more evidence.

 

[headscratcher4]

Nova, as always, an extremely useful and thoughtful contribution to this thread. Thank you.

I have always been struck by Hitler's belief in science. Indeed, the entire Nazi Movement -- much like Marxism -- has a practically mystical faith in science, specifically that science will prove it the correct ideology, policy, etc.

At the same time, there is a mystical fascination with what I will call the "higher" powers of destiny. The Nazi belief, for example, in the separateness of the Jews, was based on an odd assortment of both mystical/quasi religious beliefs -- i.e. the Jews as Christ-killers and spawn of Satan (used to play to illiterate masses) -- through philosophical interpretations -- Jews as killers/destroyers of civilization -- to scientific -- Jews could be scientifically shown to be inferior, different, a race apart, etc.

However, it is critical to point out that in each instance, IMO, science always gave way to one of the more mystical or philosophical justifications. In short, it is the foundation beliefs, the cultural beliefs -- the ancient and lingering Anti-Semitism that crowds through European history -- that ultimately determines and trumps the science.

None of the scientific investigations and tools used by the Nazis could do more than pervert scientific method in an effort to create "provable" results that buttressed Nazi philosophical and crypto-religious dogma. Measuring skulls, establishing elaborate genealogies, looking at eye and hair color, nose sizes, etc. and trying to formulate a "genetic" science around those studies that proved the superiority of the Aryan German are all a big scientific bust. In order to prove their point, scientifically, the nazi's had to inject their mystical philosophy into it.

The failure of this is clear. The Nazis, for example, had German Physics and Jewish Physics. Einstein could be rejected (at least publicly) because he was the personification of Jewish Physics -- which was some how a false physics.

In short, science, though lauded, was also subordinated to the State Mysticism. Science proved the unique right of Aryans and Nazis to rule lesser men, but any science that conflicted with this pre-determined result was to be rejected. In the end, what you are left with is a Hitler who didn't understand (or really trust) science, but one who view technology and mechanical advancement as one and the same with science.

I am struck that, in it's way, it is not unlike the historic Catholic Church during the Renascence (sic). It loved science so long as it proved the world was an earth-centered universe (with the church at the center of the Earth), but along come Galileo (sic), and suddenly science is subordinated to the dogma.

 

[thaiboxerken]

I don't value "Table Talk" as a credible source of Hitler's beliefs.

 

[thaiboxerken]

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

An essay about the reliability/credibility of Hitler's Table Talk book.

 

[headscratcher4]

Interesting, and thank you for the essay. While it makes a number of good points, it certainly doesn't win at establishing that Hitler was a "Christian" of the sort that most would recognize. If he considered himself a "Christian" it seems it was well outside of established orthodoxies. That doesn't mean he didn't believe himself to be a Christian, only that the theology he espoused may have been unique.

However, all it does go to bolster the argument at the heart of the thread that Hitler did not see himself or Nazism as an atheist movement. He, as has been pointed out by a number of parties here, saw himself in religious tradition and on a mission given him by a higher authority/god...i.e. not an atheist in anyway that the word is normally used.

I note as an aside, from the essay, the quote of Borman reserving the right, it would seem, to edit the Table Talk. Borman, my recollection is, was a professed atheist. No way to determin how Borman's oversight of the words of his hero/meal ticket (Hitler) might have been changed in such a way as to be more compatible with Borman's own views...just a thought...

 

[Jedi Knight]

I don't value "Table Talk" as a credible source of Hitler's beliefs.

Neither do I because it is just propaganda that would have been used to teach to children when the global Nazi state evolved had Hitler won.

That said, it does provide insight into Hitler's hatred for Jews (Christians) and his atheism.

JK

 

[Jedi Knight]

I guess that despite the limits imposed, JK managed to sort of hijack the thread anyway. Or maybe he is just the only one that really has a differing opinion?

Hans

Hitler was an atheist. Disprove it.

This conversation isn't about me. This conversation is about Hitler's atheism. Hitler's atheism has nothing to do with "me", OK? Get past it.

JK

 

[Franko]

they do support Jedi's stated belief that Hitler was not a Catholic and was not a Christian.

I don’t seem to recall Hitler going on and on about Jesus Christ (the fundamental required belief to be a Christian), and I certainly can’t see how someone going out of their way to violate as many of the Christian commandments (their moral creed) could be considered a “Christian” … at least not one in good standing.

Is anyone here going to honestly tell me that the Christian God (assuming he actually exist) would consider Hitler a Christian? Is any A-Theist going to argue that if the Christian God exists he let Hitler into Heaven?

 

[headscratcher4]

That said, it does provide insight into Hitler's hatred for Jews (Christians) and his atheism.

So, essentially, you don't believe Hitler unless his words can be construed to underpin your conclusions, but any words spoken that are contrary to your conclusions can be dismissed?

Hmmm, and how are you able to decern what is propaganda, what was really intended, and what is both? Obviously, you are a far cleverer scholar than many who have studied Hitler.

Additionally, methinks as your is a minority position -- a position taken by refuting, disputing and dismissing most sources and scholarship on the topic -- proving Hitler was an "atheist" is up to you.

His own words belie the contention, as do the ordinary construction of the word "atheist."

His actions, and those of his followers, belie the constructions as -- and as I have shown above -- they were completely in keeping with the historical and religiously based Anti-Semitism rampant in German and European culture.

So, his words don't support your assertion. His actions don't support your assertion. THe decernable beliefs of the majority of his followers and allies don't support your assertion.

It leads one to wonder that outside of your fixation with maintaining your position against the atheistic hoard, what your position is based on...it has been well over a couple of posts since you've even posited any "facts" to support your position, or that successfully challenge or contradict the position of us who argue that Hitler was some sort of theist -- or even a "Christian" (not my position).

In short, saying it is so doesn't make it so.

 

[Jedi Knight]

So, essentially, you don't believe Hitler unless his words can be construed to underpin your conclusions, but any words spoken that are contrary to your conclusions can be dismissed?

Hmmm, and how are you able to decern what is propaganda, what was really intended, and what is both? Obviously, you are a far cleverer scholar than many who have studied Hitler.

Additionally, methinks as your is a minority position -- a position taken by refuting, disputing and dismissing most sources and scholarship on the topic -- proving Hitler was an "atheist" is up to you.

His own words belie the contention, as do the ordinary construction of the word "atheist."

His actions, and those of his followers, belie the constructions as -- and as I have shown above -- they were completely in keeping with the historical and religiously based Anti-Semitism rampant in German and European culture.

So, his words don't support your assertion. His actions don't support your assertion. THe decernable beliefs of the majority of his followers and allies don't support your assertion.

It leads one to wonder that outside of your fixation with maintaining your position against the atheistic hoard, what your position is based on...it has been well over a couple of posts since you've even posited any "facts" to support your position, or that successfully challenge or contradict the position of us who argue that Hitler was some sort of theist -- or even a "Christian" (not my position).

In short, saying it is so doesn't make it so.

There are a variety of groups that make a living demonizing Hitler and Nazism. Communism has caused more deaths in history than Nazism could ever dream of doing and yet Communism is "celebrated" and "respected".

What is it about Nazism that has so many people annoyed? Why can't Communism, an ideology hundreds of times more evil and wicked, even come close to being as despised as the perversion it is alongside Nazism?

So yes, I will find few to agree with me but I am not wrong. The public education of individuals is not my fault.

JK

 

[headscratcher4]

There are a variety of groups that make a living demonizing Hitler and Nazism. Communism has caused more deaths in history than Nazism could ever dream of doing and yet Communism is "celebrated" and "respected".

What is it about Nazism that has so many people annoyed? Why can't Communism, an ideology hundreds of times more evil and wicked, even come close to being as despised as the perversion it is alongside Nazism?

So yes, I will find few to agree with me but I am not wrong. The public education of individuals is not my fault.

JK

I fear your comments are off the topic of the thread...a thread that was designed specifically to attempt to explore your assertions regarding Hitler's beliefs or lack of belief in a god.

I specifically made this point about Communism (stalinism) above. I think you are correct. An assertion that "Stalin was an atheist" would not rouse so much frustration (as it is also generally agreed to). I would suggest that the anger over your assertions about Nazism come not so much out of a belief on anyone's part that Nazism was worse than Communism (they are each, in their own way, foul, hateful and nasty philosophies that have caused little but death and destruction). Rather, for my part at least, it is an assertion regarding descernable history that is posited and asserted to be fact and never supported.

It would seem to me that the failure of education that you speak of is one that allows for the assertion of a "fact" and than the proving of that "fact" by mere repetition rather than show sources or logically discussing how the conclusion that something is a "fact" was reached.

We can shift the discussion to the evils of atheistic communism, if you will, and you may find that I am as likely as not to agree with your "facts" -- but shifting the discussion does little to prove your point. In short, you are wrong -- in this instance -- because you have provided nothing to lead anyone else in this discussion to change their minds, reconsider the evidence in new light, or to contradict the thrust of the opposing arguments.

As stated, saying something is so doesn't make it so, nor does it make you right -- merely misguided, at least until you can prove otherwise.

Finally, as long as we're changing the subject, why -- when you've a perfectly good example of "evil atheism" like Stalin, do you insist on fighting a losing proposition with respect to Hitler? My point is, question your own motives here, rather than the motives of those who have endeavored to have a civilized discusion with you regarding an idea that you proferred for discussion. In the end it is more about throwing gernades (as you know the propensity for just about everyone to fight any affiliation with "nazism" as opposed to the wrongly seen, and wrongly believed to be less vile communism of a Stalin). Throwing gernades can be fun -- god knows I am prone to do it as well -- but it does little to further understanding or to help you make what might be some otherwise excellent points....

 

[Jedi Knight]

I fear your comments are off the topic of the thread...a thread that was designed specifically to attempt to explore your assertions regarding Hitler's beliefs or lack of belief in a god.

I specifically made this point about Communism (stalinism) above. I think you are correct. An assertion that "Stalin was an atheist" would not rouse so much frustration (as it is also generally agreed to). I would suggest that the anger over your assertions about Nazism come not so much out of a belief on anyone's part that Nazism was worse than Communism (they are each, in their own way, foul, hateful and nasty philosophies that have caused little but death and destruction). Rather, for my part at least, it is an assertion regarding descernable history that is posited and asserted to be fact and never supported.

It would seem to me that the failure of education that you speak of is one that allows for the assertion of a "fact" and than the proving of that "fact" by mere repetition rather than show sources or logically discussing how the conclusion that something is a "fact" was reached.

We can shift the discussion to the evils of atheistic communism, if you will, and you may find that I am as likely as not to agree with your "facts" -- but shifting the discussion does little to prove your point. In short, you are wrong -- in this instance -- because you have provided nothing to lead anyone else in this discussion to change their minds, reconsider the evidence in new light, or to contradict the thrust of the opposing arguments.

As stated, saying something is so doesn't make it so, nor does it make you right -- merely misguided, at least until you can prove otherwise.

Finally, as long as we're changing the subject, why -- when you've a perfectly good example of "evil atheism" like Stalin, do you insist on fighting a losing proposition with respect to Hitler? My point is, question your own motives here, rather than the motives of those who have endeavored to have a civilized discusion with you regarding an idea that you proferred for discussion. In the end it is more about throwing gernades (as you know the propensity for just about everyone to fight any affiliation with "nazism" as opposed to the wrongly seen, and wrongly believed to be less vile communism of a Stalin). Throwing gernades can be fun -- god knows I am prone to do it as well -- but it does little to further understanding or to help you make what might be some otherwise excellent points....

There is a major problem with historical revisionism in this country and most of the west for that matter. It is getting so bad that I even quote Orwell now because that is what is happening.

The false-history being fed to students in schools today puts Hitler in the "Christian" box because he is "white" and "western" and did "evil" things.

How often in school did you ever hear anyone say that Stalin was an atheist? Or Lenin? Or Kruzchev?

Let me tell you some facts and I have said it before--a totalitarian nation-state doesn't tolerate competing forms of power. There will be one form of religion in the totalitarian nation-state--one the "government" approves.

As millions of Jews, Gypsies and other "undersireables" were being carted off to concentration camps, what were the German people doing? They had to have noticed their neighbors being carted off to be slaughtered. They didn't wake up one morning and say: "Gee, where is Mr. Goldstein at? His family hasn't been seen for 3 weeks."

Hell no. The German people were involved. They constituted the bueaucracy that made that genocide efficient.

Now ask yourself, honestly, would that have occured if Christian churches were in power in the Nazi state? Hell no.

So where were all the Christians? They were either being led to concentration camps (Jews) or part of the oppressed underground, a similar condition approaching American Christians today. America is turning into a Nazi state itself, but with matriarchal fascist structure.

If I say that I am a Catholic or a Christian, would the Catholic Church and the Pope agree to me wiping out an entire race of people? Would I approach my church and force them to sign a surrender treaty? Why would I do that if I was a supporter of the church?

As people were disappearing in the Nazi state and put in ovens, where were the churches? They weren't there before it started.

These facts aren't the fault of the modern student of history. Like I said, Hitler is the eternal icon of hatred for whiteness and Christianity, even though he wasn't a Christian. Hitler pushed for the perfect scientific state envisioned by Niezche where God was cast aside to be replaced by the "Superman" (humans). God wasn't needed anymore because God held the state back from the perfections that it could achieve. That was the ideology of Hitler and his henchmen.

It was the arrogance of atheism and the narcissism of atheism and the megalomania of power. Hitler was not a Christian. No religious authority consented to Hitler's actions.

Hitler didn't seek approval. As an atheist, Hitler pursued godless acts and proved them in history. He is the icon of what happens when an atheist leader seizes power in an advanced nation-state.

JK

 

[The Fool]

Hitler was an atheist. Disprove it.

JK

Well folks, looks like Jedi has whittled his position down to its bare essentials. "I say it is true, you cannot make me change my mind, Therefore it is definitely true..."

No Jedi, Hitler was actually a wood elf. and you can't disprove that either.

As long as you are sticking to debate proof dogma there is no point in participating in a debate. I am not interested in hearing your evidence free position restated yet again.

This thread has demonstrated that you are incapable of participating in a reasoned debate, moderated or not. As the Thread is moderated I cannot call you an Idiot, so I won't.

 

[Jedi Knight]

Well folks, looks like Jedi has whittled his position down to its bare essentials. "I say it is true, you cannot make me change my mind, Therefore it is definitely true..."

No Jedi, Hitler was actually a wood elf. and you can't disprove that either.

As long as you are sticking to debate proof dogma there is no point in participating in a debate. I am not interested in hearing your evidence free position restated yet again.

This thread has demonstrated that you are incapable of participating in a reasoned debate, moderated or not. As the Thread is moderated I cannot call you an Idiot, so I won't.

You are just a nasty person. Simply nasty. You are one of the nastiest people I have ever encountered on an internet forum. You gravitate around other people's debates, contribute nothing and just spread your vile nastiness in every post that you make.

Combine all the above with the fact that you have no personal skills and you really fit the mold for the pathetic, marginal atheist that you are--an oxygen stealer.

You couldn't even keep your pathetic drivel out of a moderated thread. No wonder more and more people are starting to view atheism as a hate-group. You could be its poster-child.

JK

 

[Aardvark_DK]

No religious authority consented to Hitler's actions.

And if someone had done that would that make any difference? Wouldn't you just say that that particular religious authority wasn't "truly Christian"? When the Inquisition burned jews as heretics were they acting in a Christian manner? Or were they really atheists?

The thing is, JK, if your theory cannot be disproven then it is worthless. Can your theory be disproven?