How to transit from the concept of God to the existence of God

[CandideWest]

I’m sure you believe that.

Believe what? That you’re aware of the “wars, persecution, bigotry, mutilation and terrorism which is going on out there RIGHT NOW because of people’s religious beliefs”.

I tend to think you probably ARE aware of them yes, but I suspect that you try to avoid acknowledging that you are.

I’m sure you also believe that some religions are better than others at discouraging crimes of violence, especially crimes of violence against unborn children.

Sure, a few religions are quite good at discouraging violence, Jainism for example. Alas those religions have quite small numbers of adherents. The bigger ones tend to claim to be against violence even while their claims are used as a justification for violence.

You take all the crimes of believers and forget all the crimes of unbelievers, as if they never existed.

Sigh, it would really help if you actually read the posts you are replying to before writing back. Again, I have been explicit about what I am answering here and why.

I’ll try again, please TRY to read it and understand this time.

I was asked why I care about people’s religious beliefs given that I don’t hold any myself.

Ok?

I answered that the reason I care is because of the terrible things which are done in the world explicitly BECAUSE OF those religious beliefs.

Understand?

So saying “but some Christians do good things too” IS NOT RELEVANT.

If we could get to the point where no more horrors were being inflicted on the world in the name of someone’s belief in some deity, I wouldn’t care about what deities people believe in any more.

BUT we don’t live in that world, we live in one where war, torture, mutilation, bigotry, fear, hatred and persecution are inflicted EVERY SINGLE DAY because someone believes that their deity wants it to happen.

Now, do you understand at last?

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Excuse me for interrrupting. But no one is lilly white when it comes to violance and other atrocities. Some here need to read their history. Adolph Hitler and the Third Reich - atheist, murdered 7million or more in cold blood, Joseph Stalin - atheist, murdered even more in cold blood, and starved millions more, Mao Tse Tung - atheist , murdered perhaps 20 million in cold blood, and the regime is still doing it, Pol Pot - atheist, murdered 2-3 million in cold blood, and of course we can’t forget Vietnam and North Kores and the entire pagan history of man before Christ. So this line of attack proves nothing. All it really serves is as rationalization for one’s own irrational decisions. :tsktsk::tsktsk::tsktsk:

None of us are saints, not even atheists!!! And if Christ can’t save the world, atheists certainly won’t be able to.

And again.

Linus2nd

 

[Charlemagne_III]

BUT we don’t live in that world, we live in one where war, torture, mutilation, bigotry, fear, hatred and persecution are inflicted EVERY SINGLE DAY because someone believes that their deity wants it to happen.

Now, do you understand at last?

I guess not. I am trying to envision Christians in America engaging in war, torture, mutilation, bigotry, fear, hatred, and persecution, and I find you have a nearly empty tank.

Would you mind filling it for me?

 

[Charlemagne_III]

I understand it by understanding what is meant by the use of the term* “beginning”.* In the case of the universe it is referring to an ongoing process, the expansion of the universe, which began 13.8 bya. It cannot be definitively stated however that the matter/energy in the universe came into being at that point, only that its expansion began at that point. The fact that the universe was at one point relatively smaller than it is now, does not mean that at some point previous to that, it didn’t exist at all.

Nor can it be stated as a fact that the universe was not created and did not begin to expand at that point. Nor can it be stated as a fact that there was not some galvanizing Force that caused the singularity to expand. Nor can it be stated as a fact that no such Force exists that causes the universe to continue to expand.

Yes, it all ends in wonderful mystery, doesn’t it? I think God made us so that the mystery could never be solved … not by science anyway.

 

[CandideWest]

Excuse me for interrrupting. But no one is lilly white when it comes to violance and other atrocities…

Really? Are none of you able to respond to what I’ve actually written?

Yes, I know there are bad people doing bad things from every group. I’ve already explicitly stated this where I said

“Of course not, there are bad people amongst every group of people. That’s why I don’t address the actions people of different religious opinions perform but focus on the actions people perform explicitly BECAUSE OF their religious beliefs.”

• Yes, there are bad atheists too (although hitler certainly wasn’t an atheist).
• Yes, there are good theists too.

BUT none of that changes the fact that people do horrific things because of their religious beliefs and if you CARE about people (as I do) then that is a perfectly sufficient reason to care about peoples religious beliefs.

That is the question I was answering. Why is this proving so hard for people to get their heads around?

 

[polytropos]

Because (in short) nothing (non-existence) existing entails a logical contradiction. As far as I can see it breaks the law of identity.

We either have to throw out logic or concede that “nothing” is not a possible state.

How does it break the law of identity? “Nothing exists” for the philosopher means that “it is the case that all existential propositions are false.” There are no two entities (let alone a single entity) around to be identical to anything. Any statements about identity in “nothing” could only (as Oreoracle points out) be vacuously true, and therefore no more problematic than they are in mathematics.

Why?

I believe it on faith. Though I also think there are several cogent arguments (some of Aquinas’s Five Ways, Barry Miller’s existential proof, Alex Pruss’s cosmological argument, James Ross’s modal argument).

 

[CandideWest]

I guess not. I am trying to envision Christians in America engaging in war, torture, mutilation, bigotry, fear, hatred, and persecution, and I find you have a nearly empty tank.

Would you mind filling it for me?

Sigh, seriously? Are you really going to claim that there are no Christians doing bad things in America because of their religious beliefs? Denying people rights. Acts of violence. Murder. Religious hatred. Intolerance and persecution. Teaching fairy stories as science. Etc. Do you even read the news?

To make matters worse. Even if your absurd claim were accurate then it would simply mean that Christians in America would be one group of people I didn’t have cause to be interested in, and is STILL be perfectly justified in taking an interest in people’s religious beliefs everywhere else in the world.

I’m starting to wonder if this is just some extended joke you are trying to make. If so, could you get to the punch line please, this is dragging somewhat.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

• Yes, there are bad atheists too (although hitler certainly wasn’t an atheist).
• Yes, there are good theists too.

BUT none of that changes the fact that people do horrific things because of their religious beliefs and if you CARE about people (as I do) then that is a perfectly sufficient reason to care about peoples religious beliefs.

So maybe there is also a reason to care about peoples’ lack of religious beliefs?

“The religions are all alike, no matter what they call themselves. They have no future – certainly none for the Germans. Fascism, if it likes, may come to terms with the Church. So shall I. Why not? That will not prevent me from tearing up Christianity root and branch and annihilating it in Germany.” Hitler

 

[Amandil]

• Yes, there are bad atheists too (although hitler certainly wasn’t an atheist).

He wasn’t a Christian either.

Just because Hitler never explicitly disavowed Christianity doesn’t mean he was a Christian.

There is such a thing as “actions speak louder than words.” He was a student of the philosophies of Ludwig Feuerbach, Karl Marx, & Frederick Engels(all atheists) as well as other popular German eugenicists. Hitler had nothing but contempt for Christianity.

• Yes, there are good theists too.

Not saying that to be “good” is not objectively good, but from one atheist to another there is no real consensus about what being “good” means, much less why any atheist ought to be “good” objectively speaking,

BUT none of that changes the fact that people do horrific things because of their religious beliefs and if you CARE about people (as I do) then that is a perfectly sufficient reason to care about peoples religious beliefs.

You’re making a faulty generalization. You’re not distinguishing between people who may do “horrible” things and whether or not what they’re doing follows from what the religion itself teaches.

If someone does “horrific” things diametrically opposed to their religion their subjective opinion that “God wills it” is necessarily absurd. Therefore it cannot possible be true that “people do horrific things because of their religious beliefs” because they are not following their “religious beliefs” but their own opinions.

It also begs the question that do you really “care” about people are do you only care about people to use them in a utilitarian sense to support your assertions?

Conversely when horrific acts necessarily follow from a belief or a philosophy(such as atheism), and you have horrific events such as the Holocaust, the slaughter of the Holodomor, the slaughter of Mao Zedong’s revolution, Pol Pot in Laos and Cambodia, which makes any so-called Christian “atrocity” look like child’s play, its patently obvious that your assertions just simply don’t hold any water.

 

[CandideWest]

So maybe there is also a reason to care about peoples’ lack of religious beliefs?

If I find someone saying

“we should discriminate against / harm / kill people because there is no god”

then yes, I’ll take an active interest in that group too. But thus far at least I’ve never seen anyone making that argument. And before you go leaping off again identifying people who do bad things AND don’t believe in a god. That isn’t enough, the BECAUSE is important. If you are going to claim equivalence then they must be doing it BECAUSE there is no god.

Just as there are many people out there saying that

“we should discriminate against / harm / kill people because they’re doing something God doesn’t like”

Again, the BECAUSE is important.

“The religions are all alike, no matter what they call themselves. They have no future – certainly none for the Germans. Fascism, if it likes, may come to terms with the Church. So shall I. Why not? That will not prevent me from tearing up Christianity root and branch and annihilating it in Germany.” Hitler

Really? You’re quoting Rauschning, Hermann (2006) - “The Voice of Destruction” as an source on Hitlers religious views? You know it’s a fraud right?

Why not go with what he actually said and wrote himself?

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. "
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922

“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

"We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity… in fact our movement is Christian. "
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Passau, 27 October 1928

The Nazi party constitution even stated “The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity”

BUT, even if you were right. This would STILL not be relevant. As I said, it’s about what people do BECAUSE OF a religious views, not what they do while holding a religious view which matters.

So the fact that Hitler was a Christian isn’t relevant either because as far as I know he didn’t do the horrific things he did BECAUSE OF his Christianity. He did them AND WAS a Christian.

The things I’m talking about are the things people do specifically BECAUSE OF their religious beliefs.

So… Do you understand now?

 

[ThinkingSapien]

Hey guys, I’m requesting that we drop the conversation that seems to be developing on atheist v theist. I don’t think any resolution will develop from it. It’s also a prohibited topic of discussion and could result in this thread getting locked (which I would really hate to see happen; this is the fifth incarnation of this thread but the first in which a god-concept is beginning to develop for what ever the argument is that KingCoil plans to present).

 

[CandideWest]

How does it break the law of identity? “Nothing exists” for the philosopher means that “it is the case that all existential propositions are false.”

As far as I can tell nothing is “non-existence” as you said “all existential propositions are false.” - necessarily including an existential proposition about itself.

So if you have “nothing exists” you have “non-existence exists”. So you’ve got “A = not A” which breaks the law of identity.

I believe it on faith.

Ok, what can be believed without justification can be rejected without justification.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Really? Are none of you able to respond to what I’ve actually written?

Yes, I know there are bad people doing bad things from every group. I’ve already explicitly stated this where I said

“Of course not, there are bad people amongst every group of people. That’s why I don’t address the actions people of different religious opinions perform but focus on the actions people perform explicitly BECAUSE OF their religious beliefs.”

• Yes, there are bad atheists too (although hitler certainly wasn’t an atheist).
• Yes, there are good theists too.

BUT none of that changes the fact that people do horrific things because of their religious beliefs and if you CARE about people (as I do) then that is a perfectly sufficient reason to care about peoples religious beliefs.

That is the question I was answering. Why is this proving so hard for people to get their heads around?

Hitler was an atheist. I know he was a baptized Catholic and even attended the seminary ( minor or major I don’t know), so was Joseph Stalin and Musolini, but like you they abandoned their faith.

So then your idea is that Christians and Jews and Muslims aren’t supposed to do violence for religious reasons. I agree. I don’t see that as an argument as a justification for abandoning Faith in God’s existence.

Let us say, for the sake of argument, that you are correct and God does not exist. Would the problem unjust violence be solved? Would the world be better without God or belief in God? I don’t see how. It never stopped violence in pagan periods of history. So how would things be any better.

This is what you said to me, " …This has nothing to do with history. It has to do with the harm and suffering being caused RIGHT NOW in the world because of people’s beliefs in these concepts. I won’t go into it here, but Greta Christina gave a good talk called “why are you atheists so angry” which covers many of my own reasons for caring so much. It’s freely available on youtube and well worth watching if you really interested in why some atheists take an interest…"

I will see what Greta has to say, perhaps she says it better. But if this is what is bothering you I suggest atheists try to do a better Job than Hitler and Stalin - just wipe us all out. But you will see that that won’t make anything better, evil will still walk the face of the earth - it would not be any better even if there were no God.

Linus2nd

 

[CandideWest]

Hey guys, I’m requesting that we drop the conversation that seems to be developing on atheist v theist. I don’t think any resolution will develop from it. It’s also a prohibited topic of discussion and could result in this thread getting locked (which I would really hate to see happen; this is the fifth incarnation of this thread but the first in which a god-concept is beginning to develop for what ever the argument is that KingCoil plans to present).

Hmmm, I think you’re probably right TS.

I set out to answer a simple and genuine question and the resulting discussion seems to have gotten out of hand.

The last thing I want is to see the thread shut down before Kingcoil can present his argument. So I’ll resist replying to the other digression post. Amandil, if you’d still like to discuss this please PM me and I’ll happily reply to your points in the by PM.

Apologies TS and thanks for the challenge.

 

[CandideWest]

Same to you Linus and Charlemagne, check out this post of mine.

…

To see if it answers your questions about why I care about religion, and for that matter about Hitlers religious beliefs (I believe it should cover both) but if you believe it doesn’t then please PM me and I’ll be happy to discuss further.

 

[Charlemagne_III]

If I find someone saying

“we should discriminate against / harm / kill people because there is no god”

then yes, I’ll take an active interest in that group too. But thus far at least I’ve never seen anyone making that argument. And before you go leaping off again identifying people who do bad things AND don’t believe in a god. That isn’t enough, the BECAUSE is important. If you are going to claim equivalence then they must be doing it BECAUSE there is no god.

Just as there are many people out there saying that

“we should discriminate against / harm / kill people because they’re doing something God doesn’t like”

Again, the BECAUSE is important.

And again, tell me what Christians are saying we should kill people becasue they are doing something God does not like. I didn’t hear it above. You’re tank is still running on empty.

Really? You’re quoting Rauschning, Hermann (2006) - “The Voice of Destruction” as an source on Hitlers religious views? You know it’s a fraud right?

Because you say it’s a fraud?

Why not go with what he actually said and wrote himself?

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. "
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922

“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

"We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity… in fact our movement is Christian. "
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Passau, 27 October 1928

The Nazi party constitution even stated “The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity”

And I think you must be a fool if you believe everything else Hitler said too. Or do you just believe what Hitler said becasue you want to believe he always told the truth? All of your quotes are by Hitler before he came to power when he was trying to assure the people that he was not the great Beast of Europe. You’re free to believe him, but then you must believe a chronic liar. How does that reflect on you?

BUT, even if you were right. This would STILL not be relevant. As I said, it’s about what people do BECAUSE OF a religious views, not what they do while holding a religious view which matters.

So the fact that Hitler was a Christian isn’t relevant either because as far as I know he didn’t do the horrific things he did BECAUSE OF his Christianity. He did them AND WAS a Christian.

**And I suppose you think Christ approved and ordered his every atrocity? **

The things I’m talking about are the things people do specifically BECAUSE OF their religious beliefs.

So… Do you understand now?

**Nope.There is nothing in my religious belief that causes me to do horrible things such as the ones you so theatrically pile up on each other. So I think your tank is still running on empty. I guess your case is too feeble to make. **

**This conversation is getting too weird for me. **

 

[polytropos]

As far as I can tell nothing is “non-existence” as you said “all existential propositions are false.” - necessarily including an existential proposition about itself.

So if you have “nothing exists” you have “non-existence exists”. So you’ve got “A = not A” which breaks the law of identity.

You are trying to draw an inference from “all existential propositions are false” to “non-existence exists”? That is pretty obviously invalid. And I have explicitly argued that “nothing exists” cannot be read as a non-negated first or second order predication of existence to some entity “nothing.”

Also, the statement “for all x in the empty set, x is not equal to x” is true. “A = not A” is not a problem if our domain is empty.

I am not sure what you mean by “necessarily including an existential proposition about itself.” Perhaps you mean that the statement “all existential propositions are false” quantifies over a domain of existential propositions. But unless we are platonists with respect to propositions (which is a view I would reject), that does not mean we are quantifying over any entities. Actually even if we are platonists with respect to proposition, we are only quantifying over abstract entities, and that is unlikely to concern anyone who believes (as a platonist would) that propositions are non-physical.

Ok, what can be believed without justification can be rejected without justification.

Let’s trace this conversation back a bit: I said I don’t believe that nothing is possible because I believe there is a necessary being. You seemed to think this meant I agreed with you. I said that it shouldn’t be taken as agreement because the necessary being I believe in is God, and you do not believe in God. You asked me why. I said that I believed it on faith and thought there were cogent arguments for God’s existence. You respond by cutting out the bit about arguments for God’s existence and saying, “what can be believed without justification can be rejected without justification.”

The irony is that I was pointing out why my belief in the impossibility of nothingness is not a case of agreement with yours, which I regard as rather implausible. The statement of belief in God (and the citation of arguments for his existence) were not arguments for the impossibility of nothingness (nor, obviously for the existence of God); they were answers to your question of why I believe nothing is impossible despite not agreeing with your basis for doing so.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

Same to you Linus and Charlemagne, check out this post of mine.

To see if it answers your questions about why I care about religion, and for that matter about Hitlers religious beliefs (I believe it should cover both) but if you believe it doesn’t then please PM me and I’ll be happy to discuss further.

Hitler was a poliltician who had to assure a large Catholic and Protestant public that he was one of them, of course he would say those things. But the fact that he murdered hundreds of thousands of Catholics and Protestants who disagreed with him proves he was no believer but an atheist.

I did listen to Greta. I think we better drop this part of the discussion - company rules!

Linus2nd

 

[josh987654321]

Same to you Linus and Charlemagne, check out this post of mine.

To see if it answers your questions about why I care about religion, and for that matter about Hitlers religious beliefs (I believe it should cover both) but if you believe it doesn’t then please PM me and I’ll be happy to discuss further.

Hi CandideWest, I have just come accross this thread, and read you post here and I believe there are a few things that you have not yet considered.

If I find someone saying

“we should discriminate against / harm / kill people because there is no god”

I find Richard Dawkins say’s something similar he say’s “I have never known anyone who went to war over lack of belief.”

However does Richard Dawkins lack belief? He believes primarily that there is no God, that we are nothing more than a make up of chemical compounds, just like the animals we eat at McDonalds or the Chair we sit on to eat our McDonals.

Here are some beliefs of Richard Dawkins -

Religious beliefs is a virus that infects inferior genes
- Richard Dawkins

Religion is not only a form of infantile regression, it’s an especially pernicious (harmful) kind of insanity
- Richard Dawkins

Dyed in the wool faith heads are immune to argument
- Richard Dawkins

Teaching religion to your children is a form of child abuse
- Richard Dawkins

I believe If you find an atheist, I’ll give you a belief system capable of discrimination, harming and or killing. Furthermore, I believe I can give you an example of it legally happening today, the legal mass muder of children within their mothers wombs. Abortion.

If your interested, there is a fantastic short (30min) documentry on youtube here - 180

then yes, I’ll take an active interest in that group too.

I would like to ask that you please join me in never voting for a pro choice politician.

But thus far at least I’ve never seen anyone making that argument.

Please see above.

And before you go leaping off again identifying people who do bad things AND don’t believe in a god. That isn’t enough, the BECAUSE is important. If you are going to claim equivalence then they must be doing it BECAUSE there is no god.

Just as there are many people out there saying that

“we should discriminate against / harm / kill people because they’re doing something God doesn’t like”

Again, the BECAUSE is important.

I wholeheartedly agree, as we shouldn’t judge a philosophy by it’s abuse. I always try to stress that.

So I would judge Christianity and Atheism on their philosophy and not their abuse.

As far as I have read, Atheism tells me that there is no such things as ‘good’ or ‘evil’ (just matters of preference such as blue or green) and it tells me that ‘people’ are simply a lump of cells, simply automated robots that dance to their DNA (no such thing as true/false), without any inherent worth … meaningless, here today, thrown into the furnace tomorrow.

However Chritianity tells me that there are things that are objectively wrong/evil and things that are objectively true. It tells me that every human being is endowed with dignity and worth by it’s very creator.

So for example, the crimes religious believers have committed in the name of God, Christians can condemn, but I believe what is really odd, is on what grounds can atheists condemn them?

I look to Richard Dawkins for an explanation and he offers me this -

*"In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pitiless indifference. As that unhappy poet A. E. Housman put it:

For nature, heartless, witless nature
Wll neither care nor know

DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music."*

The silence of atheism in areas such as morals, truth or meaning, I believe is deafening. Say we accept Richard Dawkins at his word here, so … what now? Some atheists find this liberating, but I don’t believe it’s very liberating when life becomes one big massive question mark. I alos believe it’s not very scientific to ascribe one big question mark as a conclusion.

Also when you assert that there is such a thing as good, arn’t you assuming there is such a thing as evil? and when you say there is such a thing as evil, arn’t you also assuming that there is a moral law in which to distinguish between good and evil? There must be some standard by which to determine what is good and what is evil. And when you assume a moral law, don’t you have to posit a moral law giver – the source of the moral law? But this moral law giver is precisely who atheists are trying to disprove.

Thus in the eye’s of the Atheistic worldview, I believe the words good/evil, right/wrong, ture/false, simply become meaningless. So how can they appeal to these things in an effort to debunk Religion?

I am yet to find an atheist who does not appeal to true/false, right/wrong, good/evil in their argumentation, yet they deny these very things, so in order to logically follow, Richard Dawkins I believe should produce a new book called “The Truth Delusion” but if he did that I believe it would debunk his book “The God Delusion”

Please continue to next post -

 

[josh987654321]

Continued from above post -

Many people say “Atheists can be good people too.” and “Christians can be bad people too.” and I absolutely agree.

But the difference I believe is, when a Christian acts selflessly, he/she is acting in communion with his/her worldview. When an Atheist acts selflessly, he/she is acting in direct conflict with his/her worldview.

The other argument I would like to quickly talk about because I know many Atheists use it, is they say, that religion seems to be the cause of violence in the world and not peace, but I put it to you, when two kids are in the sand pit and there is only one toy, which one will resort to violence? is it the Darwinian Evolutionist (Survival of the fittest, strong vs weak) or is it the Christian (Imitating Christ who Died on the Cross for us, who told Peter to put the sword away, good vs evil)?

Really? You’re quoting Rauschning, Hermann (2006) - “The Voice of Destruction” as an source on Hitlers religious views? You know it’s a fraud right?

Why not go with what he actually said and wrote himself?

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. "
-Adolf Hitler, in his speech in Munich on 12 April 1922

“Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”
-Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

"We tolerate no one in our ranks who attacks the ideas of Christianity… in fact our movement is Christian. "
-Adolf Hitler, in a speech in Passau, 27 October 1928

The Nazi party constitution even stated “The Party, as such, stands for positive Christianity”

BUT, even if you were right. This would STILL not be relevant. As I said, it’s about what people do BECAUSE OF a religious views, not what they do while holding a religious view which matters.

So the fact that Hitler was a Christian isn’t relevant either because as far as I know he didn’t do the horrific things he did BECAUSE OF his Christianity. He did them AND WAS a Christian.

The things I’m talking about are the things people do specifically BECAUSE OF their religious beliefs.

So… Do you understand now?

I agree, never judge a philosophy by it’s abuse, Please see above.

I would also just like to quickly share with you some quotes I have found on Hitler too.

catholic.com/magazine/art…-the-holocaust

Here is also another good article - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religio…f_Adolf_Hitler

Goebbels wrote in 1941 that Hitler “hates Christianity, because it has crippled all that is noble in humanity.”

In his semi-autobiographical Mein Kampf, he makes religious allusions, but declares himself neutral in sectarian matters and supportive of the separation between church and state, while criticising political Catholicism. He presented a nihilistic, Social Darwinist vision, in which the universe is ordered around principles of struggle between weak and strong, rather than on conventional Christian notions.

Sounds more like a Darwinian Evolutionist, survival of the fittest.

Quotes from Adolf Hitler’s book Mein Kampf (I think you will find Hitler simply used ‘Christianity’ for the vote).

“If you tell a big enough lie and tell it frequently enough, it will be believed.”
― Adolf Hitler

“It is not truth that matters, but victory.”
― Adolf Hitler

“By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.”
― Adolf Hitler

“I do not see why man should not be as cruel as nature”
― Adolf Hitler

“The victor will never be asked if he told the truth. ”
― Adolf Hitler, Hitler’s Letters and Notes

“The great masses of the people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one.”
― Adolf Hitler

Thank you for reading
Josh