hey ATHIESTS, was Hitler right?

[notself]

I quoted what you said. You were the one bringing up the red herring of Hitler being Catholic and citing his quotes as if they were linked.

Read Post #9

 

[Arnobius]

Read Post #9

I find #9 fallacious too.

Hitler can be considered Catholic in the sense that was the religion he was baptized into, but only that far. Stalin was baptized a Christian but nobody would make the case he was one.

 

[Mirdath]

I find #9 fallacious too.

Hitler can be considered Catholic in the sense that was the religion he was baptized into, but only that far. Stalin was baptized a Christian but nobody would make the case he was one.

Hitler might also be considered Catholic in the sense that he said he was Catholic all his life. Stalin didn’t.

 

[Arnobius]

Hitler might also be considered Catholic in the sense that he said he was Catholic all his life. Stalin didn’t.

As in he did not repudiate it, I assume you mean? Irrelevent. Unless you intend to prove Hitler was an ardent Catholic.

Despite the quote mining one may do on Atheist sites (the sole source of quotes claiming he was an active Catholic… note all of them save one were from before 1933 when he took power), he had a real contempt for the Church, particularly when Mit Brennender Sorge (did anyone bother reading it? I provided the link) condemned Nazism as being contrary to what the Church taught.

catholicnews.com/data/stories/cns/0703108.htm

 

[Mirdath]

As in he did not repudiate it, I assume you mean? Irrelevent. Unless you intend to prove Hitler was an ardent Catholic.

‘I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so’ – Adolf Hitler to Gerhart Engel, 1941.

Mit Brennender Sorge (did anyone bother reading it? I provided the link) condemned Nazism as being contrary to what the Church taught.

Promoting an agenda contrary to Church teaching has hardly stopped anybody professing the Catholic faith or even participating in the Mass, albeit in a state of mortal sin.

So Hitler was a hypocrite and possibly the worst scion of Christianity ever to walk the earth. What else is new?

 

[Arnobius]

‘I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so’ – Adolf Hitler to Gerhart Engel, 1941.

Curiously that was the latest comment anyone could find. None uttered after. Never quoted in context though, so for all we know it could be anything.

Like I said, only one quote (that one) was after he took power. The rest of the quotes predate 1933.

Promoting an agenda contrary to Church teaching has hardly stopped anybody professing the Catholic faith or even participating in the Mass, albeit in a state of mortal sin.

So Hitler was a hypocrite and possibly the worst scion of Christianity ever to walk the earth. What else is new?

Agreed actually. The issue is when people say “Hitler was a Catholic” it implies he was an active and practicing one, when in fact he was rather contemptuous of religion.

 

[AllSaints1631]

What? Never heard that before…

I’m surprised. I have 40 pictures of Pope Pius XII together with Hitler sharing fond moments together that is very evident by their smiles, hand shakes and embracing. Kind of tough for me to believe that they were anything but freinds.

 

[Arnobius]

I’m surprised. I have 40 pictures of Pope Pius XII together with Hitler sharing fond moments together that is very evident by their smiles, hand shakes and embracing. Kind of tough for me to believe that they were anything but freinds.

Got links? Is it possible that these pictures were not as you viewed them

This is the most common internet picture (Pius XII was a cardinal here) and indeed the only one showing the two men together.
http://i.cn.cz/1105820599_pius-xii-hitler.jpg

Looks rather like forced smiles to me

 

[ralphinal]

back to the top. Can an atheist or agnostic give a reason that a human life is of more value than any other kind of life? Can it be said that someone killing another person is a greater wrong than someone killing a horse fly?

 

[Kaninchen]

back to the top. Can an atheist or agnostic give a reason that a human life is of more value than any other kind of life? Can it be said that someone killing another person is a greater wrong than someone killing a horse fly?

It’s the rationalization that we give to a form of behavior we share with other primate species - a hard-wired behavior that has been an evolutionary advantage.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

(I read the title of the thread to myself in a The Warriors voice and cracked up – hey aaaatheists, come out and play-ay!)

Problem is, though, for the atheists, that the warrior calling them out is the Archangel Michael.

‘My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.’ - A. H., 1922

This clearly shows Hitler’s “identification” with a “Fighter Against Jews” and not Christ.

Hitler was not an atheist. He made himself a god. He was a truly monumental self-theifier.

‘We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls… We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity… in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people.’ - A. H., 1928

Since HE (Hitler) is “christ”, he demands that all other faiths subserviate themselves to worship of him.

‘However weak the individual may be when compared with the omnipotence and will of Providence, yet at the moment when he acts as Providence would have him act he becomes immeasurably strong. Then there streams down upon him that force which has marked all greatness in the world’s history. And when I look back on the five years which lie behind us, then I feel that I am justified in saying: That has not been the work of man alone.’ - A. H., 1937

Since he considers himself a god, and as a god he has “the power of heaven” with him, it’s not surprising that he would consider his “good fortune” as confirmation of his divinity, instead of as the “set up” that he’s being lead into (by God) to teach him humility.

‘We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.’ - A. H., 1933

I’m going to go with ‘no’. Your ball.

“Atheism” to Hitler meant, “Worship of other than ME!”

One can’t simply “obsess” on the use of the word “christianity” when talking about that which PRESUMES to call itself “christian”.

Calling oneself “Christian” doesn’t make one Christian.

 

[CalmDownWisWins]

back to the top. Can an atheist or agnostic give a reason that a human life is of more value than any other kind of life? Can it be said that someone killing another person is a greater wrong than someone killing a horse fly?

(( I’m not an atheist, but… ))

It is more wrong to kill a person than a horsefly because people are more like me than horseflys are.

As an atheist, I value “things that are as similar to me as possible”, because I **KNOW **that I am good, and that which is more like me is more good.

(( REAL atheists are encouraged to respond to this perception of mine of one of the voluminous rationalizations as to “atheistic ethics”. ))

 

[ralphinal]

(( I’m not an atheist, but… ))

It is more wrong to kill a person than a horsefly because people are more like me than horseflys are.

As an atheist, I value “things that are as similar to me as possible”, because I **KNOW **that I am good, and that which is more like me is more good.

(( REAL atheists are encouraged to respond to this perception of mine of one of the voluminous rationalizations as to “atheistic ethics”. ))

I was hoping someone would say this. It is simple speciesism. I am human, ergo humans are special. Personally, I have no issue with it. I agree taht I want non-believers to speak out.

 

[Kaninchen]

I am human, ergo humans are special.

That may be just a rationalization of an evolutionary process that has led to a genetic trait - “I am human, I am programmed to prefer my own species as a means of passing on my genetic legacy directly or indirectly (and only kill huge numbers of them to enlarge/defend territory etc, etc, etc which will increase the means of passing on my genetic legacy).”

 

[ralphinal]

That may be just a rationalization of an evolutionary process that has led to a genetic trait - “I am human, I am programmed to prefer my own species as a means of passing on my genetic legacy directly or indirectly (and only kill huge numbers of them to enlarge/defend territory etc, etc, etc which will increase the means of passing on my genetic legacy).”

True. But if it is a genetic advantage, would all creatures share a specese specific preferance? Would you not see that as a rule, one creature would not attack another of its own kind? Or is it just present in socail animals?

 

[Kaninchen]

True. But if it is a genetic advantage, would all creatures share a specese specific preferance? Would you not see that as a rule, one creature would not attack another of its own kind? Or is it just present in socail animals?

Ah but we do attack others of our same kind - depends on whether the situation is of genetic advantage or not.

 

[ralphinal]

Ah but we do attack others of our same kind - depends on whether the situation is of genetic advantage or not.

True. I do hate going down this road, because I do not want to. If and this is a BIG IF, someone can show that a group is genetically inferior and that person can get enough genetically superior people with him, is he not correct, from an evolutionary perspective to weed them out? Is this not the same as a shark attacking an injured shark or a herd leaving the old and sick to fall behind and die? I do not hold to this thinking, but evolutionarily speaking, should we not eliminate the defective?

 

[Kaninchen]

True. I do hate going down this road, because I do not want to. If and this is a BIG IF, someone can show that a group is genetically inferior and that person can get enough genetically superior people with him, is he not correct, from an evolutionary perspective to weed them out? Is this not the same as a shark attacking an injured shark or a herd leaving the old and sick to fall behind and die? I do not hold to this thinking, but evolutionarily speaking, should we not eliminate the defective?

We’re not sharks, we’re not wildebeest, we’re monkeys - clever monkeys.

Concepts like ‘genetically superior’ are cultural artifacts not descriptions of evolutionary strategies in monkeys (even clever monkeys). What I was arguing was that we have developed ‘rationalizations’ of primal behavior patterns - when chimps cooperate and self-support, we call it ‘instinct’, when humans cooperate and self-support, we call it ‘morality’ - the thing is that cooperation and self-support are successful evolutionary strategies, however you write them up.

Of course, once concepts like ‘morality’ are developed they take on a life of their own (like the great human artifact, ‘language’).

 

[jimmy]

(I read the title of the thread to myself in a The Warriors voice and cracked up – hey aaaatheists, come out and play-ay!)

‘My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded only by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.’ - A. H., 1922

‘We are a people of different faiths, but we are one. Which faith conquers the other is not the question; rather, the question is whether Christianity stands or falls… We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity… in fact our movement is Christian. We are filled with a desire for Catholics and Protestants to discover one another in the deep distress of our own people.’ - A. H., 1928

‘However weak the individual may be when compared with the omnipotence and will of Providence, yet at the moment when he acts as Providence would have him act he becomes immeasurably strong. Then there streams down upon him that force which has marked all greatness in the world’s history. And when I look back on the five years which lie behind us, then I feel that I am justified in saying: That has not been the work of man alone.’ - A. H., 1937

‘We were convinced that the people needs and requires this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out.’ - A. H., 1933

I’m going to go with ‘no’. Your ball.

But on the otherside of this idea is that he threw Catholic monks in the death camps as well and there are pictures of these monks side by side with the Jews. So to say Hitler was a Christian is a grave contradiction. He threw the Christians in the death camps as well. He used Christianity as a tool.

Simply quoting hitler doesn’t put the ball in our court. I have not read the article by John Martingoni but by the title I can tell it is a philosophical arguement about whether there can be a claim that Hitler was wrong without there being a god. I would say that since there is no absolute truth without God then Hitler was just as right as any man who sacrifices himself for the good of man.

 

[jimmy]

God is not necessary for justice. A reasonable mind can reach the conclusion that if this is the only life we have, then it becomes infinitely precious and that it is infinitely precious to others and must be respected.

Why is it precious without God though? I am sure that a man who is suffering from cancer and is constantly sick wont bless life if he believes there is no overarching purpose to life.