HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Hitler sought the destruc...

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 12:26 AM

Hitler sought the destruction of Christianity.

Last edited Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:23 PM - Edit history (4)
















Nazi intentions were confirmed on January 3, 1942 when The New York Times published a 30-point program detailing the key doctrines of the new National Reich Church. Below is listed the most blasphemous details of the new religion that Hitler planned to replace Christianity with:

1. The National Reich Church specifically demands the immediate turning over to its possession of all churches and chapels, to become national churches.

5. The National Reich Church is immutably fixed in its one objective: to destroy that Christian belief imported into Germany in the unfortunate year 800, whose tenets conflict with both the heart and mentality of the German.

13. The National Reich Church demands the immediate cessation of the printing of the Bible, as well as its dissemination, throughout the Reich and colonies. All Sunday papers with any religious content shall also be suppressed.

14. The National Reich Church shall see that the importation of the Bible and other religious works into Reich territory is made impossible.

15. The National Reich Church decrees that the most important document of all time-therefore the guiding document of the German people-is the book of our Fuhrer, “Mein Kampf.” It recognizes that this book contains the principles of the purist ethnic morals under which the German people must live.

16. The National Reich Church will see to it that this book spread its active forces among the entire population and that all Germans live by it.

18. The National Reich Church will remove from the altars of all churches the Bible, the cross and religious objects.

19. In their places will be set that which must be venerated by the German people and therefore is by God, our most saintly book, “Mein Kampf,” and to the left of this a sword.

21. In the National Reich Church there will be no remission of sins; its tenet is that, once committed, a sin is irrevocable and will be implacably punished by the laws of nature and in this world.

30. On the day of the foundation of the National Reich Church the Christian cross shall be removed from all churches, cathedrals, and chapels inside the frontiers of the Reich and its colonies and will be replaced by the symbol of invincible Germany-the swastika.[3]


The way that Hitler could pursue the annihilation of Christianity along with the Jews was through his war. Gereon Goldmann, a former Waffen SS solider, revealed the hidden, yet key objectives of Hitler’s war:

“One day a big shot from Berlin came to speak to us. We were stunned by what he said, but we weren’t allowed to tell anyone-it was strictly confidential. This man told us that ‘Victory could only be complete when all the churches were destroyed. Not only the Jewish religion, but also all Christian faiths would have to be eliminated’”.[4]

http://prophecyproof.blogspot.com/2010/06/threat-hitler-posed-to-christianity.html

Also see

http://books.google.com/books?id=6QngAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA240&lpg=PA240&dq=%22national+reich+church%22&source=bl&ots=aXq1BubKrA&sig=3rJfFBu4YYQvcd_401ca1IO2eZY&hl=en&sa=X&ei=fhG9UteHC-nJsQS5koC4DQ&ved=0CC8Q6AEwAzgK



I know it's shocking, but a politician being photographed coming out of a church does not always mean that he is a devout Christian.

132 replies, 11236 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 132 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hitler sought the destruction of Christianity. (Original post)
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 OP
Coyotl Dec 2013 #1
Ohio Joe Dec 2013 #2
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #3
Ohio Joe Dec 2013 #13
arcane1 Dec 2013 #53
SidDithers Dec 2013 #54
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #56
SidDithers Dec 2013 #57
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #58
SidDithers Dec 2013 #64
El_Johns Dec 2013 #95
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #99
El_Johns Dec 2013 #102
arcane1 Dec 2013 #74
SidDithers Dec 2013 #7
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #8
Gravitycollapse Dec 2013 #20
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #48
Ohio Joe Dec 2013 #49
SidDithers Dec 2013 #4
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #6
Major Nikon Dec 2013 #110
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #50
SidDithers Dec 2013 #52
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #109
SidDithers Dec 2013 #112
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #113
SidDithers Dec 2013 #115
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #119
SidDithers Dec 2013 #120
treestar Dec 2013 #122
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #123
treestar Dec 2013 #121
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #124
treestar Dec 2013 #125
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #126
SidDithers Dec 2013 #111
steve2470 Dec 2013 #5
bhikkhu Dec 2013 #16
grahamhgreen Dec 2013 #9
jberryhill Dec 2013 #12
bobclark86 Dec 2013 #14
LAGC Dec 2013 #39
Glassunion Dec 2013 #41
grahamhgreen Dec 2013 #47
jberryhill Dec 2013 #89
Egalitarian Thug Dec 2013 #77
jberryhill Dec 2013 #86
Brother Buzz Dec 2013 #15
uponit7771 Dec 2013 #32
JI7 Dec 2013 #10
jberryhill Dec 2013 #11
Fumesucker Dec 2013 #17
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #24
Fumesucker Dec 2013 #26
JHB Dec 2013 #34
El_Johns Dec 2013 #103
defacto7 Dec 2013 #18
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #22
vdogg Dec 2013 #29
arcane1 Dec 2013 #68
exboyfil Dec 2013 #88
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #63
SidDithers Dec 2013 #67
defacto7 Dec 2013 #114
Gravitycollapse Dec 2013 #19
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #23
Gravitycollapse Dec 2013 #130
sabrina 1 Dec 2013 #128
Gravitycollapse Dec 2013 #129
blkmusclmachine Dec 2013 #21
aikoaiko Dec 2013 #25
countryjake Dec 2013 #37
nyquil_man Dec 2013 #27
JHB Dec 2013 #33
The Straight Story Dec 2013 #28
intaglio Dec 2013 #30
Bohunk68 Dec 2013 #31
jberryhill Dec 2013 #38
Bohunk68 Dec 2013 #43
jberryhill Dec 2013 #44
jberryhill Dec 2013 #42
B Calm Dec 2013 #35
el_bryanto Dec 2013 #36
Bluenorthwest Dec 2013 #40
Quixote1818 Dec 2013 #45
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #82
SidDithers Dec 2013 #46
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #51
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #55
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #59
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #61
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #65
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #70
DisgustipatedinCA Dec 2013 #73
jeff47 Dec 2013 #78
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #81
jeff47 Dec 2013 #83
Marr Dec 2013 #60
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #62
Marr Dec 2013 #69
rdharma Dec 2013 #66
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #72
rdharma Dec 2013 #75
Cerridwen Dec 2013 #71
Zorra Dec 2013 #76
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #80
Zorra Dec 2013 #90
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #93
Zorra Dec 2013 #97
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #101
Zorra Dec 2013 #104
rdharma Dec 2013 #79
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #84
rdharma Dec 2013 #87
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #91
rdharma Dec 2013 #96
Gore1FL Dec 2013 #85
YOHABLO Dec 2013 #92
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #94
rdharma Dec 2013 #98
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #100
RetroLounge Dec 2013 #105
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #106
RetroLounge Dec 2013 #107
LineLineLineLineReply .
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #108
RetroLounge Dec 2013 #116
Nye Bevan Dec 2013 #117
RetroLounge Dec 2013 #131
Vashta Nerada Dec 2013 #118
rurallib Dec 2013 #127
arely staircase Dec 2013 #132

Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:02 AM

1. I guess Hitler knew Jesus wasn't white!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:13 AM

2. Some religious nutjob distancing himself from Hitler...

Well... That makes religious nut jobs people we should listen to... Or trust... Or give a shit about

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohio Joe (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:20 AM

3. He was referencing the New York Times (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 02:46 AM

13. Well... That makes it so much less batshit crazy...

or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:05 PM

53. Written one month after Pearl Harbor.

 

I can't help but compare that to the post-9/11 New York Times reporting, especially when it came to WMD claims and Iraq invasion support. There were many many books published in support of those topics as well, none of which could be trusted.

I'm willing to entertain the possibility, but I'll need more than one blog and one book,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to arcane1 (Reply #53)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:08 PM

54. Remember the stories about Kuwaiti babies thrown from incubators?..nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #54)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:19 PM

56. Lots of DUers favoring Hitler over the New York Times in this thread.

I guess lots of people really, really hate the NYT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #56)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:20 PM

57. The NYT article is wartime propaganda...

You can't see that?

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #57)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:24 PM

58. So, any story the NYT published about the Nazis during the war,

we should just ignore? They pretty much just made shit up during that whole period? You seriously think that Hitler earned the benefit of the doubt in this regard?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #58)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:34 PM

64. Not all of them...

But this particular one, published three weeks after Pearl Harbor, certainly is.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #58)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:45 AM

95. I think you need to do more research, not just pull a 1942 article out of the archives.

 

The article gives the impression that the Reich Church was purely a creation of the Nazi Party. But it wasn't.

And it was never the only church extant under the Nazis.

And by the time the NYT was reporting on it, the Nazis had already given up on the Reich Church concept.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to El_Johns (Reply #95)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:30 AM

99. OK.

In his bestselling book "Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy", biographer Eric Metaxas devotes a chapter to the intersection between Nazi propaganda and Christian theology.


One sometimes hears that Hitler was a Christian. He was certainly not, but neither was he openly anti-Christian, as most of his top lieutenants were. What helped him aggrandize power, he approved of, and what prevented it, he did not. He was utterly pragmatic. In public he often made comments that made him sound pro-church or pro-Christian, but there can be no question that he said these things cynically, for political gain. In private, he possessed an unblemished record of statements against Christianity and Christians.

Hitler’s attitude toward Christianity was that it was a great heap of mystical out-of-date nonsense. But what annoyed Hitler was not that it was nonsense, but that it was nonsense that did not help him get ahead. According to Hitler, Christianity preached “meekness and flabbiness,” and this was simply not useful to the National Socialist ideology, which preached “ruthlessness and strength.” In time, he felt that the churches would change their ideology. He would see to it.

Martin Bormann and Heinrich Himmler were the most passionately anti-Christian members of Hitler’s inner circle, and they didn’t believe the churches should adapt or could. They wanted the clergy crushed and the churches abolished, and they encouraged Hitler along these lines whenever possible. They hoped to accelerate the timetable for open warfare with the church, but Hitler was in no hurry. Whenever he attacked the churches, his popularity waned. Unlike his top men, Hitler had an instinctive political sense of timing, and now was not the time to take on the churches directly. Now was the time to pretend to be pro-Christian. Hitler’s architect, Albert Speer, was a firsthand witness to Hitler’s coldblooded approach: “Around 1937, when Hitler heard that at the instigation of the party and the SS vast numbers of his followers had left the church because it was obstinately opposing his plans, he nevertheless ordered his close associates, above all Göring and Goebbels, to remain members of the church. He too would remain a member of the Catholic Church, he said, although he had no real attachment to it.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #99)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:35 AM

102. I have no idea whether Hitler was a "Christian" or not (whatever "Christian" might mean in the

 

minds of people arguing the case) & I don't think anyone does, including Eric Metaxas.

I posted about the Reich Church, which has a documented history and wasn't Hitler's brainchild. The fact that the NYT apparently said nothing about it until 1942 (it was founded in 1933 as a merger between multiple sects), after Pearl Harbor, strikes me as interesting timing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #54)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:46 PM

74. Or the "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities"?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohio Joe (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:38 AM

7. That blog is serious crazyville...



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:43 AM

8. I've added the link to "The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich" by William H Shirer (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:17 AM

20. William H. Shirer is widely criticized among relevant scholars.

He was apparently not a terribly well informed individual despite his popularity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ohio Joe (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:48 PM

48. You think he's a 'religious nut job' because he distanced himself from Hitler?

Then call me a 'religious nut job'!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #48)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:50 PM

49. No. I think he's a religious nut job because I took a look at his blog

He's a fucking loon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:28 AM

4. Holy fuck, what a batshit loony site...

Are you suggesting that anyone take seriously anything posted at that blog?

Is that blog part of your regular reading? Do you support the other nonsense posted there?



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:37 AM

6. How about the acclaimed journalist and historian William L Shirer?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 03:42 AM

110. You should read what Shirer said more closely

He is expressing what Rosenberg's vision was, not necessarily Hitler's. You should read page 234 of your reference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_Rosenberg#Nazi_policy_and_Rosenberg.27s_views

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:52 PM

50. Are you saying that there are no other sources for this information?? You have not

commented, again, on the substance of the OP. We'd love to have your opinion on other sources for this information.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #50)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:56 PM

52. No, I'm saying that the sOurce that the OP led with...

presumably because they thought they were credible, is a batshit loony site.

What do you think of the site, sabrina? You know, since you never use questionable sources.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #52)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 03:29 AM

109. Since I already knew Hiter's views of Christianity it wasn't necessary to go the site.

This information has been confirmed by many other extremely credible sources. It's not new information you know.

Apparently YOU went to the site though and rather than check the veracity of the information you did as expected.

Hitler did want to destroy Christianity and reliable sources who have done intense research on his attitude towards Christians have verified that his ultimate goal was to destroy what he viewed as something that had too much power over the people he wanted to control.

I never accept ONE source for anything. Nor do I decide something is not true because the source isn't all that reliable. The Enquirer was right about Edwards eg although many people scoffed at their coverage. A lesson in how people should never dismiss anything until they have done their research.

Why is it important to you to dismiss sources and try to influence others to do the same? I doubt anyone listens, but it's odd to say the least.

I abhor censorship as a real evil and threat to democracy as do most people in this country. We are more than capable as adults to figure out the facts using every source available. Sometimes as in the Edwards case, the MSM are too afraid to publish something they know to be true and we have often found that publications that are not considered reliable sources often step in where the MSM cannot.

You would be a lot more informed if you didn't worry so much about what other read. We will read what we want to read, so I'm not sure what your point is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #109)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 03:58 AM

112. Maybe you should go to the site...

before castigating me for pointing out that it's a batshit loony site.



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #112)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 04:05 AM

113. I don't care about the site. I care about the information which I am more than familiar

with and have no need to read any more than I have already regarding this issue. It appears the site's main point is correct, and that is all I am interested in, since THAT is the topic of this OP, NOT the site.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #113)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 04:10 AM

115. Yeah, sure...



"This information has been confirmed by many other extremely credible sources."

Funny how you tout the credibility of these phantom sources, but ignore the lack of same in the source that led to this thread. How about some links to these other "extremely credible sources"?

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #115)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:07 PM

119. It's not my job to educate you about this topic. Google is a great source of information, IF

you really want it. Historical scholars have researched this topic for decades but you are capable of doing your homework IF you are interested. I never waste time providing links unless I know the person requesting them is sincerely interested in getting facts.

IF you were interested in the topic, you would have done a little research and then stated that it would have been better to provide more reliable sources or words to that effect. Since you didn't, my conclusion is you are not interested in the topic.

Oh, I almost forgot:



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #119)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:09 PM

120. Oh I forgot...

you don't do links to support your assertions.

Typical dodge from you.



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SidDithers (Reply #120)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:23 PM

122. She does not have to because she already knows that information!

Did she not explain that to you above, Sid?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #122)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:27 PM

123. Exactly!! And yes, I DID expain it clearly to Sid.



Are we having fun yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #119)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:22 PM

121. You must spend a lot of time doing homework

For just one, you consider yourself completely informed on Hitler's views of Christianity.

Knowing all it would take to be an expert on that would take a lot of time. Only professors would be able to take the time, and that being their field in which they publish.

You must be an Einstein. I'm sure this is not the only topic on which you are completely informed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #121)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:36 PM

124. Of course I do, doesn't everyone? Well, ALMOST everyone.

And no, it does not take an 'awful lot of time'.

If I had claimed to be 'an expert' on the subject you might have a point. Hilarious! Same old same old lame personal attacks, which have zero affect on me.

So, how about you, since you are admonishing me for not providing links, provide us with links that proved Hitler was a Devout Christian.

I'm assuming you are agreeing that Christianity is responsible for the Holocaust since so far you have provided no links to back up that assertion, I will rely on my own research, which didn't take a whole lot of time, btw.

Personal insults, the last resort of those who cannot back up their claims. I'll say it again, they have zero affect on me.

Oh, no discussion of serious issues is complete without this:



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #124)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 02:06 PM

125. Sid was talking about a particular blog

Which you had no need to read.

You claimed you knew all you needed to know and didn't have to link to anything.

I don't claim to be such a genius.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #125)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 02:26 PM

126. I stated a FACT. I had no need to read a blog I am not familiar with when

I have already researched this topic using familiar and credible sources.

Do NOT accuse me of lying unless you have proof of such. I am sure the Admins can determine if someone has clicked a link or not, if it is so important to you and Sid, feel free to ask them.

Sid's method of derailing OPs he doesn't agree with is well known on DU. He attacks the source and offers nothing else but we all know and love Sid enough to know exactly what he means.

Since you are defending his position, which is that Christianity was responsible for the Holocaust, please provide, what you are demanding of me, some links to back that up, credible links. I will be more than happy to refute ACTUAL arguments after I see one from either you or Sid.

Now, since you did make an actual false assertion about ME, and I'm flattered to be the subject of your and Sid's attention, rather than the important topic of the OP, I insist on FACTS not false personal attacks, no matter how lame.

You, eg, claimed that I claimed to 'be an expert on the suject' in one post, and here you make another false claim about ME:

You claimed you knew all you needed to know and didn't have to link to anything.

I don't claim to be such a genius.


No, I stated a fact, did not just CLAIM anything, that I already had the information regarding Hitler's intentions towards Christians. No one can EVER have enough information on any topic, so I would not say that. My comments were in relation to THIS OP, and to Sid's attempt to distract from the topic.

So please link to where I claimed to be an expert on this subject, along with my statement that I need no other information. Or where I claimed to be a genius.

Thank you in advance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #50)


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:29 AM

5. One of my history books records the attempt of the regime to "nazi-ize" even Christmas

"The Third Reich: A New History" by Michael Burleigh, http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0809093251/ref=oh_details_o00_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

The churches (especially the Catholic Churches from my memory) pushed back very hard on Hitler's attempt to degrade them, so (again from memory) the regime gave up.

eta: This may be what your site is referring to: Protestant Reich Church

eta2, this might be the original NYT article: http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20A1FFD3C5D167B93C1A9178AD85F468485F9

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to steve2470 (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 02:57 AM

16. That's what I understood - initially an agressive nationalization campaign

(which has been done many times, in many places), and then a pull back to more practical demands. Not to apologize for Hitler, but to the extent that Christian churches in Germany weren't especially persecuted, they also didn't get in the way of the program much.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:49 AM

9. Nah, even their belt buckles read "god is with us".... They used God like the RW does here...

 



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:57 AM

12. No, that's what they kept asking on the Russian front...

"Got mittens?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 02:51 AM

14. Owie...

beer... in nose... owie...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 09:58 AM

39. ...



Thanks, I needed that this morning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #12)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:54 AM

41. Thread win!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glassunion (Reply #41)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:44 PM

47. I was all like ROFL, and then I started picturing the poor bastards, eeech:0

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #47)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:30 AM

89. Yeah

As I mentioned below, my uncle was a conscript on the Russian front. He told me the joke, actually.

He has a missing finger and he told us as kids that he lost it picking his nose. Actually, it froze and broke off in a tank tread. Eventually, he ate cigarette butts to induce appendicitis and get sent to the rear where he deserted.

Made a lifelong atheist out of him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #12)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:05 AM

77. OMFG I'm ROTFLMAO.

 

I know we don't agree on pretty much anything, but that's fucking funny!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egalitarian Thug (Reply #77)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:25 AM

86. I'm sure we agree on plenty

The not funny part is I learned that joke from my uncle who was there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 02:53 AM

15. Word!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 08:35 AM

32. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:50 AM

10. that is one weird site

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 01:56 AM

11. He should have just waited

Since American Christians of a certain bent are destroying it on their own

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 02:59 AM

17. And this article was in the NYT about a month after Germany declared war on the US

It could almost have been written by Judith Miller.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:44 AM

24. Heh. A New York Times article is unreliable because of what Judith Miller wrote 60 years later.

Okayyyyyyyyyyy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:52 AM

26. The first casualty of war is truth.

Now if you found a similar Times article from *before* Dec 7, 1941 I'd be more inclined to credit it as unbiased.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #24)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 09:07 AM

34. Perhaps a 2002 article would be better...

...prompted by a publication of documents of by the Rutgers Journal of Law and Religion (http://www.camlaw.rutgers.edu/publications/law-religion ),

Full article at
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/13/weekinreview/word-for-word-case-against-nazis-hitler-s-forces-planned-destroy-german.html
Word for Word/The Case Against the Nazis; How Hitler's Forces Planned To Destroy German Christianity
By JOE SHARKEY
Published: January 13, 2002

***
In the 1920's, as they battled for power, the Nazis realized that the churches in overwhelmingly Christian Germany needed to be neutralized before they would get anywhere. Two-thirds of German Christians were Protestants, belonging to one of 28 regional factions of the German Evangelical Church. Most of the rest were Roman Catholics. On one level, the Nazis saw an advantage. In tumultuous post-World War I Germany, the Christian churches ''had long been associated with conservative ways of thought, which meant that they tended to agree with the National Socialists in their authoritarianism, their attacks on Socialism and Communism, and in their campaign against the Versailles treaty'' that had ended World War I with a bitterly resentful Germany.

But there was a dilemma for Hitler. While conservatives, the Christian churches ''could not be reconciled with the principle of racism, with a foreign policy of unlimited aggressive warfare, or with a domestic policy involving the complete subservience of Church to State.'' Given that these were the fundamental underpinnings of the Nazi regime, ''conflict was inevitable,'' the summary states. It came, as Nazi power surged in the late 1920's toward national domination in the early 30's.

According to Baldur von Schirach, the Nazi leader of the German youth corps that would later be known as the Hitler Youth, ''the destruction of Christianity was explicitly recognized as a purpose of the National Socialist movement'' from the beginning, though ''considerations of expedience made it impossible'' for the movement to adopt this radical stance officially until it had consolidated power, the outline says.

Attracted by the strategic value inherent in the churches' ''historic mission of conservative social discipline,'' the Nazis simply lied and made deals with the churches while planning a ''slow and cautious policy of gradual encroachment'' to eliminate Christianity.
***


IMO, the American versions of the phenomena are things line "prosperity gospel", and the views parodies by Al Franken with his "Supply Side Jesus": rather than replace, rewrite the teachings that conflict with one's favored worldview.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #24)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:40 AM

103. Considering that the Reich Church had been extant for nearly 10 years before the article appeared,

 

but the NYT was printing as this were some new "news", & considering that by the time the NYT deemed it "news" the Party had pretty much given up on their ambitions for the Reichs church -- yeah, it kinda seems like propaganda rather than "news".

Rosenberg's "30 points" were written in 1933. The Reich Church failed in its objective, which was to unite all Protestant denominations under the banner of the state.

http://books.google.com/books?id=LTXs7xqzseEC&pg=PA62&dq=reich+church+rosenberg+30+point&hl=en&sa=X&ei=QGi-UrSzJ5XioASq74HIDw&ved=0CD4Q6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=reich%20church%20rosenberg%2030%20point&f=false

I guess the NYT only learned of it in 1942....yeah, right.

Or maybe Rosenberg didn't write it at all...

"A 30 point program for a neo-pagan 'National Reich Church' circulated as a leaflet and attributed by Allied propaganda to Rosenberg was disavowed by the government; Heydrich...attributed the reappearance of this leaflet to Catholic elements out to defame the regime...The author...was an eccentric...who composed it in 1937..."

http://books.google.com/books?id=S7fMPiMbiNAC&pg=PA254&dq=reich+church+rosenberg+30+point&hl=en&sa=X&ei=J2m-UsbFEIPvoATakIHYDQ&ved=0CE8Q6AEwBA#v=onepage&q=reich%20church%20rosenberg%2030%20point&f=false

History is not simple stuff & doesn't lend itself to simplistic conclusions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:10 AM

18. Totally propaganda crap.

Propaganda on the religious and political front then parroted by religious zealots today to prove some kind of anti-history pseudo hype to relinquish blame. That's how Bush and his cronies sold us the Iraq war. Read Mein Kampf yourself and get over this BS. Hitler was a Catholic, or in his words, "a Catholic for life" a quote from Mein Kampf.

prophesyproof - my ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to defacto7 (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:41 AM

22. Given the totality of what we know about Hitler,

I find the NYT article about his planned "Reich Church" a whole lot more plausible than the theory that he was a devout Catholic.

I do understand, however, that this does not fit with the preferred narrative of many, and I apologize for any disappointment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #22)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 05:58 AM

29. I agree

Hitler pretty much advocated the destruction of anything that did not meet the definition of pure aryan descent. It is also known that the Nazis dabbled in occult mythology. I would not be shocked at all if he trying to create a Reich Church. Religion is the greatest propaganda vehicle of them all and we know how Nazis loved their propoganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vdogg (Reply #29)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:36 PM

68. And there was a lot to learn about power and control from the Roman Catholics.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vdogg (Reply #29)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:29 AM

88. I think his ultimate goal would be to bring all power sources

under himself. He appears to have been some pseudo-spiritual nutjob who would exploit anything to increase his power. The shame is that many Christians went along with him. Many did not as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to defacto7 (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:34 PM

63. So, you tend to give Hitler the benefit of the doubt on this.

That is certainly your right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #63)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:36 PM

67. ...



Doubling down with a "giving Hitler the benefit of the doubt" smear.

Weak sauce.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #63)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 04:05 AM

114. Now there's the twisted sense of reason

I have come to expect from a person bent on removing their responsibility for touting fact-less nonsense. I guess the idea is to add more fact-less nonsense to a point where exhaustion of all possible recollection of reason give one the impression of superiority. It's a tactic used by eons of religious spin-masters to create their empty reality. It's sad really that facts are so scary to believers that they become unable to tell the difference between data that is the basis for reasonable conclusion and conclusions from empty ideological practices. BTW, the only sense of disappointment I have is the fact that humans in the 21st century still exist in a fantasy world devoid of reason or for that matter documented history.

As for giving Herr. H. the benefit of the doubt.. it's just too bizarre of a comment to do any more than have a good laugh... and you did mean that as a joke, right? Otherwise the alternative would be a blatant insult or passive aggressive taunt which I don't think could be considered civil enough to take seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:12 AM

19. To suggest that The Third Reich targeted Jews and Christians equally is mindlessly absurd.

As stated above, Christian rhetoric was in common usage among Nazis and Nazi ideology.

That website and its contents looks like a gigantic steaming pile of BS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #19)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:42 AM

23. That would indeed be absurd. I hope nobody suggested that.

Making Christianity illegal and substituting a "Reich Church" is awful but does not compare to the murder of six million Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #23)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 08:04 PM

130. Your own OP suggests it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Gravitycollapse (Reply #19)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 06:10 PM

128. It would be mindlessly absurd if anyone had suggested it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #128)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 08:04 PM

129. "The way that Hitler could pursue the annihilation of Christianity along with the Jews..."

That's equivocating in order to portray a false equivalence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:29 AM

21. SSame as "The Family."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:47 AM

25. American neo-Nazis are going to hate this guy.


oh well

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #25)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 09:34 AM

37. My thoughts exactly.

Trying to claim that hitler wasn't a christian will come as quite the shock to the many skinheads across the country who wear Jesus on their necks right alongside their swastika tattoos.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 03:55 AM

27. Hitler sought to replace one religion with another in which he was the god.

We're fixating on the debate over whether or not Hitler was a believer when the main point is that he was a narcissist.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nyquil_man (Reply #27)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 08:43 AM

33. +1. IMO this has more in common with "prosperity gospel"...

...and "supply side Jesus": people bending their religion to their self-aggrandizing worldview.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 04:16 AM

28. "The Jews and their lies" by Martin Luther

Seemed an influence in Hitler's writings.

https://archive.org/details/TheJewsandTheirLies

In Mein Kampf the evidence of such is obvious. I note this because Martin Luther was a Christian and had similar disdain for Jews during his time.

Hitler, imho, saw Christianity more as a vehicle than a belief. More than a few religious folks did not agree with his take on things but there was enough sentiment via some churches and their perceived oppression by Jews (usury for example) that he was able to tap into those of faith for his own purposes (Might be worth noting that it was also the leading faith in the area at the time so if you want to tap into the people you ride along on that but branch out - basically saying 'hey, I believe too but I have a different spin on this one part').

What we believe when we heard the term Christian is one thing, an ideal we hold, but in practice some in power hear something different. A road they can travel and twist to lead others to a different place. Whether a Jewish leader doing the same or a Christian one (or any other ideology/religion) is not a mark on the core tenants nor all people in said group. It is though a mark against the ability of people to think rationally and use it as crutch to justify actions they might not otherwise take. In this case, as noted, the majority were of a Christian faith so it was used to piggy back other ambitions, in biblical times Jewish leaders used the faith of the people around them to conquer other lands, kill, etc.

Which all boils down to ignorance and the fear of the people - religion itself is not to blame, people are for finding ways of justifying what they hear to support the goals of the few (kind of like the US right now and how we justify everything the government does out of fear of terror. Most people don't want to die, let alone at the hands of a terrorist so we keep the boogeyman going and normal everyday folks are more than happy to give up privacy and rights. No religion to blame their either - just mentally lazy people wanting someone else to solve the problem those other people invented in the first place).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 07:49 AM

30. Ri-i-i-ght so Hitler kow-towing to the Pope and kissing the rings of Cardinals

was an attempt to destroy the Christian Church.

Then there is the small matter of his recruitment of Lutherans ministers to his cause and his near plagiarism of Luther's views on the Jews was also part of that attempt ...

Some of Hitler's Nazi ministers were anti-Christian but far from all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to intaglio (Reply #30)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 08:32 AM

31. Yes, he did recruit some Lutheran ministers, along with

a whole bunch of other ministers. He didn't get them all. I refer you to the tale of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Lutheran minister who was executed just before the war's end for being in an assassination plot to kill Hitler. You will find an enormous amount of information on Bonhoeffer at Augsburg Press and many books on his life and writings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bohunk68 (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 09:57 AM

38. Bonhoeffer was an exception

Yes, and Martin Luther King Jr. was a Protestant minister from Georgia.

Pre-war Germany was overwhelmingly reformed Protestant.

Bonhoeffer was about as representative of German Protestants of his time and place as MLK Jr. was. He is trotted out regularly in this context to provide evangelicals with a denial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #38)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 06:40 PM

43. Was not trotting him out

as I am not what is today being described as evangelical, but nice to know you can read minds. I am very well aware of Herr Bonhoeffer and his stances on many things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bohunk68 (Reply #43)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 06:46 PM

44. I don't understand what you mean by "read minds"


I said he is regularly trotted out by evangelicals as if he were representative of reformed Protestant attitudes in Nazi Germany.

I did not say that you were one, nor that you were doing so for that purpose.

It's the same way that, despite overwhelming majority Christian sentiment in the pre-civil-war south, many today believe they would have been among the minority of abolitionists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bohunk68 (Reply #31)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 12:02 PM

42. More about your "some"


Bonhoeffer is an anecdotal "one".

I believe you meant to say "MOST" Lutheran ministers.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article.php?ModuleId=10005206

Historically the German Evangelical Church viewed itself as one of the pillars of German culture and society, with a theologically grounded tradition of loyalty to the state. During the 1920s, a movement emerged within the German Evangelical Church called the Deutsche Christen, or "German Christians." The "German Christians" embraced many of the nationalistic and racial aspects of Nazi ideology. Once the Nazis came to power, this group sought the creation of a national "Reich Church" and supported a "nazified" version of Christianity.

...

The most famous members of the Confessing Church were the theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer, executed for his role in the conspiracy to overthrow the regime, and Pastor Martin Niemöller, who spent seven years in concentration camps for his criticisms of Hitler. Yet these clergymen were not typical of the Confessing Church; despite their examples, the Protestant Kirchenkampf was mostly an internal church matter, not a fight against National Socialism. Even in the Confessing Church, most church leaders were primarily concerned with blocking state and ideological interference in church affairs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 09:14 AM

35. Someone is trying to rewrite history.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 09:23 AM

36. That's not a reliable source of information. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:32 AM

40. Links to Crazy Town really don't make the 'faith community' look better.

 

Hitler's views about my people are the same as the views of most of the religious clerics leading the major religious clubs. The current Pope got his power and fame as a crusading anti gay fire breather, the Pat Robertson of Argentina, so vicious was his language that the President of Argentina called Francis words 'Medieval and suggestive of the Inquistion'. So you need less insane links.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 06:55 PM

45. Hitler used the climate of Christian antisemitism in Germany. He could not have

succeeded without all the Christians who hated the Jews.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Quixote1818 (Reply #45)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:15 AM

82. I fully agree. And this is in no way inconsistent with the premise of this OP. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 08:36 PM

46. Kick...

'cause this attempt to rewrite history is just too delicious to let die.

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 10:54 PM

51. Hitler wanted to fill Bundt cake holes with puppy blood!

 

Christian puppy blood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #51)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:12 PM

55. I have a NY Times story. What do you have?



It couldn't possibly be that you are making shit up, could it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:27 PM

59. I wouldn't make shit up, no sir.

 

That would be bad.

In any case, I'm interested in hearing more of this brand new history you've brought.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #59)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:30 PM

61. Some of the very best DUers like to cite the NY Times as a source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #61)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:35 PM

65. Yes. Some of the best. But this is a diversion from puppy murder.

 

I'm still waiting to hear more about Hitler's plan. How much was Hitler able to reduce the church in Germany? When were the last of the Christians driven out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DisgustipatedinCA (Reply #65)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:39 PM

70. Here's a 2002 NY Times article with more information.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/01/13/weekinreview/word-for-word-case-against-nazis-hitler-s-forces-planned-destroy-german.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm



In the 1920's, as they battled for power, the Nazis realized that the churches in overwhelmingly Christian Germany needed to be neutralized before they would get anywhere. Two-thirds of German Christians were Protestants, belonging to one of 28 regional factions of the German Evangelical Church. Most of the rest were Roman Catholics. On one level, the Nazis saw an advantage. In tumultuous post-World War I Germany, the Christian churches ''had long been associated with conservative ways of thought, which meant that they tended to agree with the National Socialists in their authoritarianism, their attacks on Socialism and Communism, and in their campaign against the Versailles treaty'' that had ended World War I with a bitterly resentful Germany.

But there was a dilemma for Hitler. While conservatives, the Christian churches ''could not be reconciled with the principle of racism, with a foreign policy of unlimited aggressive warfare, or with a domestic policy involving the complete subservience of Church to State.'' Given that these were the fundamental underpinnings of the Nazi regime, ''conflict was inevitable,'' the summary states. It came, as Nazi power surged in the late 1920's toward national domination in the early 30's.

According to Baldur von Schirach, the Nazi leader of the German youth corps that would later be known as the Hitler Youth, ''the destruction of Christianity was explicitly recognized as a purpose of the National Socialist movement'' from the beginning, though ''considerations of expedience made it impossible'' for the movement to adopt this radical stance officially until it had consolidated power, the outline says.

Attracted by the strategic value inherent in the churches' ''historic mission of conservative social discipline,'' the Nazis simply lied and made deals with the churches while planning a ''slow and cautious policy of gradual encroachment'' to eliminate Christianity.



The short answer is that other events prevented Hitler from carrying his plans through to fruition.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #70)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:45 PM

73. I am aware that Hitler wasn't a fan of Christianity.

 

I'm aware that he tipped his hat to Christianity on occasion for political reasons, like lots of other politicians past and present. But getting rid of Christianity and sending Jews to Madagascar were similar in one respect: they were both compelling to Hitler, but never got off the ground. It just wasn't going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #55)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:12 AM

78. Would you like the NYT stories on Iraq having WMDs?

That turned out to be 100% true, right?

It couldn't possibly be that you are making shit up, could it?

The NYT couldn't possibly have been publishing war propaganda, could it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #78)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:14 AM

81. Hmmm. Between the NY Times and Adolf Hitler, who to give the benefit of the doubt?

Tricky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #81)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:15 AM

83. Hmmm...Between the NY Times and Saddam Hussein, who to give the benefit of the doubt?

Guess what? It wasn't the NY Times. Turns out Saddam was telling the truth about not having WMDs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:29 PM

60. What's your point here?

 

I'm an atheist myself, but I don't see Hitler as any real reflection on Christianity. Adolph Hitler was, first and foremost, a dick head, as many respected historians have noted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Marr (Reply #60)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:31 PM

62. There's been a few recent posts claiming that Hitler was a "devout Catholic" (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #62)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:37 PM

69. Hmm. Odd to see that trotted out, just as the new Pope is proving so unpopular with rich assholes.

 

Interesting.

I'm not suggesting that the people who posted it here or argue the point are on the side of rich assholes, by the way-- but these things tend to be stirred up just when they're needed, and they echo around through the media canyons for a while. I remember the sudden rehabilitation of Hamilton just after Bush Jr. was appointed, for instance. Suddenly Jefferson was a idealistic fool, and Hamilton the responsible, strong statesman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:35 PM

66. So that's why they had military chaplains in the Wehrmacht!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #66)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:43 PM

72. And I simply cannot think of any reason why this would have been the case,

if Hitler planned on getting rid of Christianity! No reason at all! I mean, if Hitler was serious about getting rid of Christianity, he would have dismissed every single military chaplain on the first day of his chancellorship! Right before dynamiting every single Christian church and having every single Christian clergyman arrested! You have demolished my entire premise and I reluctantly tip my hat to you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #72)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:58 PM

75. Is your OP an attempt to .....

 

...... defend all the Nazis who were also self- proclaimed "Christians" (as most were)?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Fri Dec 27, 2013, 11:42 PM

71. Reminds me of Henry VIII. Re-writing "religion" in ones own image.

Nothing new there. Damned near every dictator/despot/king has claimed "legitimacy" as "evidenced by God."

"I would like the last of the kings to be strangled by the guts of the last priest."

We don't have royal kings now. Now we have "kings of industry" and elected representatives who are "leaders."

Meh. I hope they all receive that which they wish for those they consider "lesser." I'd like to see it in my lifetime so I can enjoy the show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:03 AM

76. Uh-huh. Please explain why he didn't arrest Christians and send them to concentration camps like

he did to the Jews, LGBT, Roma, etc?

Hitler was definitely not a Christian, but your information looks like US propaganda to help fuel the war effort.

Don't get me wrong, I have no doubt that Hitler would have murdered Christians if it somehow served his deranged worldview.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #80)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:37 AM

90. Not acceptable evidence, IMO. Most "Christians" don't consider JW's "Christian".

If Hitler had locked up the Christian population of Germany, France, and Poland like he did the Jews, LGBT, Roma, and JW's, you'd have a case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #90)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:41 AM

93. I think you may be a little bit confused.

The NY Times article cited in the OP does not claim that Hitler planned to exterminate or even incarcerate Christians. Rather, his plan was to abolish the Christian churches and substitute the "Reich Church".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #93)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:50 AM

97. Well, I may be confused, but I just didn't see any credible sources for the info.

I'm one of them Librul Democrats, so I need to see those kinds of semi-assurances of credible information before I consider believing anything I hear, or read, and even sometimes see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #97)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:31 AM

101. Here's another source.

In his bestselling book "Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy", biographer Eric Metaxas devotes a chapter to the intersection between Nazi propaganda and Christian theology.


One sometimes hears that Hitler was a Christian. He was certainly not, but neither was he openly anti-Christian, as most of his top lieutenants were. What helped him aggrandize power, he approved of, and what prevented it, he did not. He was utterly pragmatic. In public he often made comments that made him sound pro-church or pro-Christian, but there can be no question that he said these things cynically, for political gain. In private, he possessed an unblemished record of statements against Christianity and Christians.

Hitler’s attitude toward Christianity was that it was a great heap of mystical out-of-date nonsense. But what annoyed Hitler was not that it was nonsense, but that it was nonsense that did not help him get ahead. According to Hitler, Christianity preached “meekness and flabbiness,” and this was simply not useful to the National Socialist ideology, which preached “ruthlessness and strength.” In time, he felt that the churches would change their ideology. He would see to it.

Martin Bormann and Heinrich Himmler were the most passionately anti-Christian members of Hitler’s inner circle, and they didn’t believe the churches should adapt or could. They wanted the clergy crushed and the churches abolished, and they encouraged Hitler along these lines whenever possible. They hoped to accelerate the timetable for open warfare with the church, but Hitler was in no hurry. Whenever he attacked the churches, his popularity waned. Unlike his top men, Hitler had an instinctive political sense of timing, and now was not the time to take on the churches directly. Now was the time to pretend to be pro-Christian. Hitler’s architect, Albert Speer, was a firsthand witness to Hitler’s coldblooded approach: “Around 1937, when Hitler heard that at the instigation of the party and the SS vast numbers of his followers had left the church because it was obstinately opposing his plans, he nevertheless ordered his close associates, above all Göring and Goebbels, to remain members of the church. He too would remain a member of the Catholic Church, he said, although he had no real attachment to it.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #101)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:47 AM

104. Need link and bibliography, please...thanks. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:12 AM

79. The unfortunate truth is that .....

 

..... most Nazi party members were self-proclaimed Christians (Catholic and Lutheran).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #79)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:18 AM

84. "Hitler and the Nazi party would never have risen to power without appealing to the religious

sentiments of the German people. Thus, they carefully crafted rhetoric that would enable them to appear as faithful leaders who God had appointed to bring Germany back from the ruin it had experienced after WWI."

http://www.examiner.com/article/were-the-nazis-christians

In his bestselling book "Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy", biographer Eric Metaxas devotes a chapter to the intersection between Nazi propaganda and Christian theology.


One sometimes hears that Hitler was a Christian. He was certainly not, but neither was he openly anti-Christian, as most of his top lieutenants were. What helped him aggrandize power, he approved of, and what prevented it, he did not. He was utterly pragmatic. In public he often made comments that made him sound pro-church or pro-Christian, but there can be no question that he said these things cynically, for political gain. In private, he possessed an unblemished record of statements against Christianity and Christians.

Hitler’s attitude toward Christianity was that it was a great heap of mystical out-of-date nonsense. But what annoyed Hitler was not that it was nonsense, but that it was nonsense that did not help him get ahead. According to Hitler, Christianity preached “meekness and flabbiness,” and this was simply not useful to the National Socialist ideology, which preached “ruthlessness and strength.” In time, he felt that the churches would change their ideology. He would see to it.

Martin Bormann and Heinrich Himmler were the most passionately anti-Christian members of Hitler’s inner circle, and they didn’t believe the churches should adapt or could. They wanted the clergy crushed and the churches abolished, and they encouraged Hitler along these lines whenever possible. They hoped to accelerate the timetable for open warfare with the church, but Hitler was in no hurry. Whenever he attacked the churches, his popularity waned. Unlike his top men, Hitler had an instinctive political sense of timing, and now was not the time to take on the churches directly. Now was the time to pretend to be pro-Christian. Hitler’s architect, Albert Speer, was a firsthand witness to Hitler’s coldblooded approach: “Around 1937, when Hitler heard that at the instigation of the party and the SS vast numbers of his followers had left the church because it was obstinately opposing his plans, he nevertheless ordered his close associates, above all Göring and Goebbels, to remain members of the church. He too would remain a member of the Catholic Church, he said, although he had no real attachment to it.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #84)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:25 AM

87. Face it.....Nazi Germany was a majority Christian nation.

 

Katholisch und Evangelisch!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #87)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:37 AM

91. I fully agree with that (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #91)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:49 AM

96. Excuse me, but this "Nazis weren't Christian"....

 

..... is a favorite RW talking point.

It's like the "Hitler was a left-wing socialist" meme. NSDAP .......right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:23 AM

85. He painted roses, too.

But most of what he did was evil.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:40 AM

92. Is this suppose to be some type of analogy or comparison with the Obama Administration?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to YOHABLO (Reply #92)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:43 AM

94. No. You're thinking of the "warning signs of fascism" threads (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #94)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:02 AM

98. Odd answer to the question. nt

 

Referring to your response #94 to question #92.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rdharma (Reply #98)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:31 AM

100. Extremely odd questions typically get odd answers (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:59 AM

105. What a festering pile of OP BS



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #105)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 02:01 AM

106. Thanks. Some interesting food for thought there.

I always welcome constructive criticism that adds to and elevates the tone of the debate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #106)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 02:14 AM

107. Nazis were Christians. You should learn to deal with that.



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #107)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 02:30 AM

108. .


One sometimes hears that Hitler was a Christian. He was certainly not, but neither was he openly anti-Christian, as most of his top lieutenants were. What helped him aggrandize power, he approved of, and what prevented it, he did not. He was utterly pragmatic. In public he often made comments that made him sound pro-church or pro-Christian, but there can be no question that he said these things cynically, for political gain. In private, he possessed an unblemished record of statements against Christianity and Christians.

Hitler’s attitude toward Christianity was that it was a great heap of mystical out-of-date nonsense. But what annoyed Hitler was not that it was nonsense, but that it was nonsense that did not help him get ahead. According to Hitler, Christianity preached “meekness and flabbiness,” and this was simply not useful to the National Socialist ideology, which preached “ruthlessness and strength.” In time, he felt that the churches would change their ideology. He would see to it.

Martin Bormann and Heinrich Himmler were the most passionately anti-Christian members of Hitler’s inner circle, and they didn’t believe the churches should adapt or could. They wanted the clergy crushed and the churches abolished, and they encouraged Hitler along these lines whenever possible. They hoped to accelerate the timetable for open warfare with the church, but Hitler was in no hurry. Whenever he attacked the churches, his popularity waned. Unlike his top men, Hitler had an instinctive political sense of timing, and now was not the time to take on the churches directly. Now was the time to pretend to be pro-Christian. Hitler’s architect, Albert Speer, was a firsthand witness to Hitler’s coldblooded approach: “Around 1937, when Hitler heard that at the instigation of the party and the SS vast numbers of his followers had left the church because it was obstinately opposing his plans, he nevertheless ordered his close associates, above all Göring and Goebbels, to remain members of the church. He too would remain a member of the Catholic Church, he said, although he had no real attachment to it.”



- "Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy", by Eric Metaxas

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #108)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:20 PM

116. So you proved you can cut and paste over and over

That about all you proved, except your use of propaganda and shitty sources.

yawn...

RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RetroLounge (Reply #116)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 12:59 PM

117. Perhaps instead of citing and quoting from several sources I should adopt your approach

and post things like "What a steaming pile of BS!!!". Much quicker and easier, with no research, cutting or pasting required.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Reply #117)

Sun Dec 29, 2013, 08:52 PM

131. No, just keep linking to "Prophecy Proof"

so we can all point at you and laugh...



RL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 01:04 PM

118. I can't even take this OP seriously when you link to the loony blog "Prophecy Proof".

 

Here are some headline "gems" from that blog:

The Severity of the Upcoming Persecution of Antichrist’s Enemies


God Controls the Weather & the Fate of Nations


I periodically published articles last year about trends in large magnitude earthquake activity (“large” is defined by magnitude 7.0 and greater) since 1900 and about where the year 2011 stood in terms of large magnitude earthquake activity. The reason I periodically publish articles about trends in large magnitude earthquake activity is that one of the birth pangs signs that Christ mentioned to watch for is great earthquakes in many places.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vashta Nerada (Reply #118)

Sat Dec 28, 2013, 02:45 PM

127. Agree 100%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nye Bevan (Original post)

Sun Dec 29, 2013, 09:54 PM

132. Ayn Rand was an athiest

Not the enlightened humanist kind. But rather she despised Jesus's instructions to help the poor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread