Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Manchu wrote:A golden age of Spanish imperial power? Cause that's what happened.

I originally went to google to find documents supporting my point, and instead found out that what i learned in school was wrong. By the time of the edict of expulsion the jews had withdrawn from the financial sector in spain, and the expulsion and little adverse effect on the spanish economy.

It might have something to do with the fact that people of all over the world have a habit of doing terrible things.
It might also have something to do with the the corrupt establishment that uses Christianity to further it's political agenda.

@Ahtman: Yeah, I see your point. See my comment to EF re: Martin Luther.

generalgrog wrote:Ketara your last reply was so intellectually dishonest that I'm going to refrain from responding to you anymore. When you learn to stop taking people out of context and making stuff up out of the air. Then maybe I''ll try again to have an internet discussion with you.

GG

I beg your pardon?

I have no problem with admitting I'm wrong online, if I can be demonstrably proven to be wrong. I've done it in here several times. Telling me I'm being intellectually dishonest, and then refraining to expound upon that point is mildly counter-intuitive?

If you disagree with me, say why. Lay it out logically and precisely.

Telling me I'mw rong but you don't want to talk to me anymore is not only a waste of your time to post, but a waste of my time to read.

There were inquisitions before the Spanish Inquisition.

generalgrog wrote:Why do they do this? Because if they can convince people that Hitler/nazis were a Christian group they can point the finger at them and say...seee...seee this is what Christianity gets you. You could also argue that Christians say that Hitler/Nazis were athiests/panthiests/occultists...see....see this is what athiests/panthiests/occultists gets you. The reality is that no one wants to own them. OK we all get that.

I would definately argue that it is the Christians that love to mention Hitler as opposed to atheists, because whenever I see the point argued its always the Bill O Reilly/Glenn Beck/Fox news anchor type person who brings it up first. "Hitler!" they shriek. Its like the Religious groups love mentioning the guy even though it is utterly irrelevant. They are in love with personally attacking Charles Darwin as well, which is disgraceful and again, utterly irrelevant to the fact of evolution. Would Einsteins work suddenly become wrong if he was a pedophile?

But anyway, Ive chilled alot of the Religion stuff as i am well aware that once a persons mind is made up on this topic they are unlikely to change it, and I get along well with most people regardless of If they believe in magic or not. So all i will say is, maybe he was not a Christian, but he absolutely 100% DID believe in "a" God, so therefore he may not have been a Christian (though I believe he was) but he most certainly cannot have been an Atheist, because we believe that there is no God, and Hitler never shut up about "The Lord" or "The almighty" or whatever, and the quote in my sig is a famous Hitler one as well.

Khornholio wrote:I think the pile of bodies is enough evidence for that.

No, neither murder nor torture are evidence against someone's choice of religion. People do evil things in the name of religion all the damn time.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

generalgrog wrote:Ketara if you want to talk about "what constitutes a Christian", please start a new thread, or PM me. This thread is about nazis.

GG

This is a bit of a cop out. You've argued that Nazi's aren't Christian. The first step in this discussion would be to clarify what constitutes a Christian and whether or not Nazis could be viewed as compatible or whether their views clash (on critical levels).

It's not a cop out...if we started to talk about an issue as large as "what is a Christian really?" it would end up usurping this entire thread. You see how the slavery rabbit hole went. Also it's not a cop out because I told him to start a new thread if he wanted to explore it.

GG

Given the prevalence of Christianity in Europe during the time period, I would definitely say that it is incredibly likely most Nazis were Christian... but that doesn't mean they represented Christianity in all of its myriad forms. No, Nazis represented only for Nazis.

Claiming that Nazis aren't Christian just because they did bad things is irrelevant, as adhering to a religion does not prevent anyone from doing bad things.

Ketara wrote:

generalgrog wrote:Ketara your last reply was so intellectually dishonest that I'm going to refrain from responding to you anymore. When you learn to stop taking people out of context and making stuff up out of the air. Then maybe I''ll try again to have an internet discussion with you.

GG

I beg your pardon?

I have no problem with admitting I'm wrong online, if I can be demonstrably proven to be wrong. I've done it in here several times. Telling me I'm being intellectually dishonest, and then refraining to expound upon that point is mildly counter-intuitive?

If you disagree with me, say why. Lay it out logically and precisely.

Telling me I'mw rong but you don't want to talk to me anymore is not only a waste of your time to post, but a waste of my time to read.

Allright I'll give it one more try.( I hate to do this because it is off the topic of nazi/Christianity debate)

You made a claim that I was relying on a book that had been translated 1/2 a dozen times. That 1/2 a dozen times figure shows your ignorance of the subject. The Bible has probably been translated 1,000's of times. I don't know how many languages their are in the world but I'm sure there is a translated Bible for each of them.

And if you were implying that the historical Bible was translated over and over again like the phone game or something again you would be showing your ignorance of the transmissional process of the ancient texts. You pulled that stuff out of the air to try and make people think the Bible is unreliable, which it isn't unreliable to anyone that has actually done some research on the subject.(again if you want to debate Bible reliability pm me or start a new thread)

My original point was regarding the leadership of nazis. You were the one to expand the definition to anyone that claimed to be nazi. I agreed with your assesment that my original classification was too narrow(I.E. only the leadership). This is why I started to talk about "every one that claimed to be a nazi and so forth". Then you took me out of context and claimed that I had changed, when in reality I was just accepting your expansion. You started accusing me of having "disintegrated argument" or whatever you said. It just seemed to me that you were willfully ignoring my attempt at finding common ground with you.

GG



Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:Given the prevalence of Christianity in Europe during the time period, I would definitely say that it is incredibly likely most Nazis were Christian... but that doesn't mean they represented Christianity in all of its myriad forms. No, Nazis represented only for Nazis.

Claiming that Nazis aren't Christian just because they did bad things is irrelevant, as adhering to a religion does not prevent anyone from doing bad things.

Of course this totally contradicts what Christ said about wolves in sheep clothing.

GG

And that matters how?

People are inherently flawed. If you want to say everyone who doesn't follow every single edict given by their religious faith is not actually a member of their religious faith, then I guaran-fething-tee that less tan five percent of the population belongs to any religion.

Melissia wrote:Given the prevalence of Christianity in Europe during the time period, I would definitely say that it is incredibly likely most Nazis were Christian... but that doesn't mean they represented Christianity in all of its myriad forms. No, Nazis represented only for Nazis.

Claiming that Nazis aren't Christian just because they did bad things is irrelevant, as adhering to a religion does not prevent anyone from doing bad things.

I have to agree ...History is filled with examples of atrocities committed by those who professed to be Christian,and the fact that someone was a member of the National Socialist Party doesn't mean that they abandoned their Christian identity.

The idea that they weren't following Christian tenants does not negate that many considered themselves to be Christian.

Melissia wrote:And that matters how?

If a wolf dresses in sheeps clothing, and walks around with the sheep, is it a wolf or a sheep?

I see that there is a new thread about "what is a Christian". I'm gonna mosey on over there for this.

GG

Funny, I think ninety percent of Christians would be disqualified from being Christians by that statement.

What I find extremely interesting is the way many Christians will (understandably) try to distance themselves from "distasteful examples" of people who profess to believe the same basic things they themselves believe.

For example..(although admittedly a reach)..

If I,as a War gamer,who has read all the rule books,know the rules of the game,play regularly etc etc,was to go and shoot someone in the head....could the war gaming community claim I was "Not" a War gamer?

generalgrog wrote:
It's not a cop out...if we started to talk about an issue as large as "what is a Christian really?" it would end up usurping this entire thread. You see how the slavery rabbit hole went. Also it's not a cop out because I told him to start a new thread if he wanted to explore it.

GG

You argued that Nazi's are not Christians. The logical next step would be to define what is a Nazi (easy enough), what is a Christian (much harder), and whether the two are comparable.

FITZZ wrote:
If I,as a War gamer,who has read all the rule books,know the rules of the game,play regularly etc etc,was to go and shoot someone in the head....could the war gaming community claim I was "Not" a War gamer?

I like this example.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

generalgrog wrote:
It's not a cop out...if we started to talk about an issue as large as "what is a Christian really?" it would end up usurping this entire thread. You see how the slavery rabbit hole went. Also it's not a cop out because I told him to start a new thread if he wanted to explore it.

GG

You argued that Nazi's are not Christians. The logical next step would be to define what is a Nazi (easy enough), what is a Christian (much harder), and whether the two are comparable.

FITZZ wrote:
If I,as a War gamer,who has read all the rule books,know the rules of the game,play regularly etc etc,was to go and shoot someone in the head....could the war gaming community claim I was "Not" a War gamer?

I like this example.

Each stage of completing a thread requires a new thread.

Clearly.

corpsesarefun wrote:
Each stage of completing a thread requires a new thread.

Clearly.

Well, now we have to define 'thread' as well as 'new'.

Emperors Faithful wrote:

corpsesarefun wrote:
Each stage of completing a thread requires a new thread.

Clearly.

Well, now we have to define 'thread' as well as 'new'.

I'll go make a new thread for it

But to do that we must first define what "new" and "thread" are so I know what to do to find out what "thread" and "new" are...

corpsesarefun wrote:I'll go make a new thread for it

But to do that we must first define what "new" and "thread" are so I know what to do to find out what "thread" and "new" are...

Yeah, I er-um....

FITZZ wrote: What I find extremely interesting is the way many Christians will (understandably) try to distance themselves from "distasteful examples" of people who profess to believe the same basic things they themselves believe.

For example..(although admittedly a reach)..

If I,as a War gamer,who has read all the rule books,know the rules of the game,play regularly etc etc,was to go and shoot someone in the head....could the war gaming community claim I was "Not" a War gamer?

It is quite simple, I as a jew recognize that some the Israeli leadership are nationalistic, racists, bastards. I also realize they are in fact jewish, regardless of how far the stray from following the tenants of the torah.

generalgrog wrote:Allright...I'm tired of this coming up in every thread about atheism and Christianity. I didn't want to derail another thread about it so lets have it out here, shall we? Keep it out of the other thread, please.

Some people, inparticular Athiests love to say that Hitler/Nazis were Christians. Why do they do this? Because if they can convince people that Hitler/nazis were a Christian group they can point the finger at them and say...seee...seee this is what Christianity gets you. You could also argue that Christians say that Hitler/Nazis were athiests/panthiests/occultists...see....see this is what athiests/panthiests/occultists gets you. The reality is that no one wants to own them. OK we all get that.

Now that, that is overwith lets discuss.

Let me start the ball rolling with some of Hitlers quotes. copy pasted from here....http://answers.org/apologetics/hitquote.html

The book being relied on by the website you listed, Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944, is widely, almost completely disregarded by serious historians. There are no supporting documents for any of the quotes given, and in many instances we know them to be complete fabrications, because Hitler was known to be an entirely different place at the time of the supposed quote. It is a work of fiction, that was written with the specific political goal of distancing Hitler from Christianity.

The actual, reliable quotes from Hitler that we do have paint a very different picture;

From Mein Kampf;
"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.."

""My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded 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."

From a Munich speech; 28 July 1922
"Just as the Jew could once incite the mob of Jerusalem against Christ, so today he must succeed in inciting folk who have been duped into madness to attack those who, God's truth! seek to deal with this people in utter honesty and sincerity."

Another Munich speech, 1 May 1923
"We have faith that one day Heaven will bring the Germans back into a Reich over which there shall be no Soviet star, no Jewish star of David, but above that Reich there shall be the symbol of German labor - the Swastika. And that will mean that the first of May has truly come."

He overtly stated his party stood for positive Christianity, the absurd belief that Jesus was part of an aryan tribe in the region, and that the bible should be read first and foremost as a call to arms against the Jews for their persecution of the aryans. Which is utterly, utterly stupid, and should be called such, and the real and very important differences between it and other Christian teachings should be recognised... but pretending is an historical delusion, accepted by people who like to think that merely considering oneself part of their religion somehow makes them a moral person.

Which just isn't how the world works.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Khornholio wrote:From a lot of reading I have done in Uni and on my own post-grad time, the Nazis were very interested in the occult.

That wasn't the Nazis as a whole. That was one guy, SS leader Heinrich Himmler, who had occult leanings in amongst his other lunacies. From there we've seen a vast mythology develop in fiction and pseudo-historical fiction, which makes great sense in fiction terms, because zombie occult Nazis are awesome, but has nothing to do with actual history.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

generalgrog wrote:Hmm that's a good question. My first question would be Which God or god are they referring to?

They're referring to the Christian God. The buckle reference is still there from it's origins in Prussian military garb.

Think about what you just did, by the way. You attempted to create some kind of secret conspiracy in which Nazis deified some other God that was so secret not even the Nazis knew about him... in order to avoid accepting the idea that someone can profess a belief in Jesus, and also be a fethwit.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Stormrider wrote:This thread does bring up an interesting thought, but the NSDAP was not based in anything remotely Christian. There were sections of Christianity (Seventh Day Adventists, Catholics & Quakers) that were persecuted just as much as the Jews.

No. You can belief in your own form of Christianity while persecuting many other kinds. Exactly as the Nazis did, constantly referencing a belief in German Protestantism.

The Nazi hierarchy didn't like Christianity at all

Nonsense.

So in short, the Nazi's weren't Christians, they were radical Socialists.

Ridiculous. Calling them socialists is exactly as sensible as claiming North Koreans are Republicans.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

generalgrog wrote:So...at what point does the Bible or Christ say it is a good thing to exterminate the jews? Wasn't that a foundational tenet of the Nazis?

Are yuo claiming there was no anti-semitic teaching in church in Germany (greater Europe actually) in the inter-war period. It was horrendously common.

And also there is evidence of the SS divisions desecrating churches when they rolled through France.

Catholic churches, yeah? You do know the history of protestantism and catholicism in Europe, yeah?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:Saying the Nazi's were Christians is even more foolish.

No, it isn't. While the situation is very complex, the only simple way to describe the situation is to say that Nazi Germany was majority Protestant, that the leadership of the Nazi party almost entirely professed a belief in Protestantism, and encouraged belief and chruch attendance among German citizens.

Nazism and Christianity are not compatible belief systems and you ignore the fact that not every German was a Nazi and not every 'Nazi' was a balls to the wall nutcase like Hitler.

Incompatibility doesn't make one incapable of being both. All it requires is for the individual to be hypocritical or delusional. Something that was in no short supply in Nazi Germany, nor in other place at any point in time.

The Nazi leadership was most definetly not Christian.

But they were. Saying otherwise is basic historical ignorance.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:Again: you've missed the point. You could say that Christianity had an effect on anything in Western culture. It's a truism. Nothing particular is explained about National Socialism by trying to trace its origins in Christianity -- because it has no specific origins in Christianity.

The animosity towards the Jews has a particularly Christian origin, though*. Look at the Bloody White Baron as he took over Mongolia, the people were right there with him as he persecuted the Chinese merchants, but utterly baffled as he set about persecuting the Jews - they had no idea why anyone would consider the Jews a threat or an enemy.



*Well, Abrahamic orgin, I guess, given the Muslims have a hate on for the Jews as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:What Martin Luther has to do with Hitler specifically -- outside of Hitler's ahistorical understanding of the German Volk -- or, what you claim their relationship to be, is totally beyond me.

Hitler's understanding and approach to God was steeped in Protestant Christian thought. He went to church. The only reason anyone would claim he was somehow not Christian was because they don't want him in their camp. Which has everything to do with revising history to make it easier to fit with pre-existing worldviews, and nothing to do with learning the truth.

What can really be said about Christianity and fascism? Well, as Christianity declines in influence . . . the influence of fascism seems to wax.

Note there is no correlation between the level of Christianity in specific countries and the level of fascism - in fact, given the three countries in Europe to fall to fascism were its most faithful, you could make a (weak) argument for the exact opposite of what you're claiming.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:It's just an attempt to link lower Christianity by saying that they influenced Nazism.

No, it is an attempt to represent the realities of Nazi belief. It does not, and cannot, reflect poorly on the millions upon millions of Christians who have led, and continue to lead good lives.

It is an important thing, because history will teach you that even people who express a belief in the same God as you can still be very, very bad people, and that it is important to look past such superficial piffle and into the real substance of a leader.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Emperors Faithful wrote:What do you call it when people speak the truth, but do so in a manner that comes dangerously close to trolling?

If a person is telling the truth, in a way that's relevant to the thread, then he can't be trolling. In those cases anyone accusing him of trolling is just putting their fingers in the ears and yelling 'I can't hear you!'


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Amaya wrote:Where in the Bible does it say to go hate Jews?

Anti-semitic teaching was commonplace in churches in Europe at the time.

And where are these in the New Testament?

Biblical literalism often plays with taking specific quotes in isolation, without any consideration for the surrounding passages, or the historical conditions at the time, or how those lines have been understood and used by Christians through history.

Amaya, your effort above is perhaps the most pure example of that I've ever seen.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

generalgrog wrote:

Melissia wrote:And that matters how?

If a wolf dresses in sheeps clothing, and walks around with the sheep, is it a wolf or a sheep?

It is a wolf. But note the analogy argues for some kind of deceipt to be present, that the wolf is dressing up in, and pretending to be something it knows it is not.

Now consider a sheep, it isn't dressed as if it were a sheep, but it really is a sheep that lives with others just like it. Except is kills and murders other sheep. It is not a wolf, it is still a sheep, albeit a very bad one and not like the other sheep at all. But still a sheep.

Stormrider wrote:

snurl wrote:I have an old German belt buckle from WWII.
Around the eagle in the center are the words (translated): God With Us

Now why would they do that?

That has little to do with a belief in the tenets of Christ, this was a hold over from Imperial Germany. WWI German Belt buckles had this same motto on there as well. Much of the Nazi's appeal was to disaffected WWI Veterans who felt that they had been betrayed by the "juncker class" (land owners, military industrialists, wealthy bankers) of Imperial Germany because of the surrender in November 1918.

This thread does bring up an interesting thought, but the NSDAP was not based in anything remotely Christian. There were sections of Christianity (Seventh Day Adventists, Catholics & Quakers) that were persecuted just as much as the Jews.

The Nazi hierarchy didn't like Christianity at all, but the Christian population of Germany was large enough for them to not overtly make it a crime to be a practicing Christian, that would come out through "education" in HJ schools, the NPEA Bureaucrat school, Juncker Schools and Public education run by the Party. The idea wasn't to completely turn the table over, but to slowly un-Baptize Germany.

So in short, the Nazi's weren't Christians, they were radical Socialists.

Thank you for that answer. I have wondered about that for years.

snurl wrote:Thank you for that answer. I have wondered about that for years.

You really shouldn't thank him. 90% of his post was nonsense.

sebster wrote:

snurl wrote:Thank you for that answer. I have wondered about that for years.

You really shouldn't thank him. 90% of his post was nonsense.

But it feels true, and isn't that really what makes something true?

Ahtman wrote:But it feels true, and isn't that really what makes something true?

Truthiness!

sebster wrote:If a person is telling the truth, in a way that's relevant to the thread, then he can't be trolling. In those cases anyone accusing him of trolling is just putting their fingers in the ears and yelling 'I can't hear you!'

Well, I would have called it being blunt, but whatever floats your boat.

sebster wrote:

generalgrog wrote:
If a wolf dresses in sheeps clothing, and walks around with the sheep, is it a wolf or a sheep?

It is a wolf. But note the analogy argues for some kind of deceipt to be present, that the wolf is dressing up in, and pretending to be something it knows it is not.

Now consider a sheep, it isn't dressed as if it were a sheep, but it really is a sheep that lives with others just like it. Except is kills and murders other sheep. It is not a wolf, it is still a sheep, albeit a very bad one and not like the other sheep at all. But still a sheep.

This is very much sigged, BTW.

sebster wrote:

snurl wrote:Thank you for that answer. I have wondered about that for years.

You really shouldn't thank him. 90% of his post was nonsense.

Really? Some proof would be great. I shouldn't expect any though.

The NSDAP is completely godless in it's foundation, the use of Christianity was a ploy to rile up Germany's substantial Christian population. The hierarchy of the NSDAP considered Christians useful idiots.

Surely the idea of "because he did bad things he wasnt a Christian" is absurd, I liked KCs wargaming analogy, but isnt it even easier than that?

When i see a Christian asking a non believer questions (Ray Comfort is a good one) one of the first things he does is say "Did you ever tell a lie?" or "do you ever use the lords name in vain?" or "do you ever look at a woman with lust?" and when the answer is invariably "Yes", he points out that "just being a good guy isnt enough" because God is so pure, that even a tiny white lie means you cant get into heaven, and thats why we believe in Jesus.

Ergo. If according to the bible, a tiny lie, or a bit of lust, or a little theft are just as bad as murder or rape, then surely, by that logic NOBODY is a Christian?

Seems like a logic fail to me. And in that case, i think its safe to assume that Adolf was a Christian, or at the very absolute least he was a Deist. He might have been a dick, but he talked about God, praying and "the lord" and described himself as one, so ergo, he was one.

He most certainly wasnt in Mattys camp.

Not that it matters anyway.

Are you referring to yourself in the third person now?