10/26/09

Adolf Hitler Was a Christian! Was Adolf Hitler a Christian?, part 2

Please note that this essay will now be housed in True Freethinker’s section on Adolf Hitler / Nazism / Communism
Share |

TwitThis

Posted by Ken
Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

11 comments:

  1. DerekOctober 26, 2009 at 10:53 AM

    Even if Hitler had written a book called "Why I, Adolf Hitler am a Christian" that would still mean exactly zilch as to whether he actually was or not. Just the same as if I published a book about why I am an evolutionary naturalist, even though I don't hold to or live my life as if I believe in evolution or naturalism. I remember evilbible.com from waaaaaaaaaay back. Poor fools.

    ReplyDelete
  2. kh123October 28, 2009 at 3:15 AM

    I'll take the robust atheist historical route and state that Hitler's actual policies and views had absolutely nothing to do with things such as, say, The Nazi Master Plan: The Persecution of the Christian Churches, documents prepared by the OSS at the Nuremberg Trials, archived online by Rutgers (who have the original documents)...

    No, really; between all his talk about the "Iron Laws of Nature", "the struggle for existence", "thou shalt preserve the species", and how Slavs, Africans, or any "less evolved" peoples were biologically untermensch (echoing Darwin's own words, I believe)... Besides all of that, Hitler was apparently an awesome Christian. Thus spoke Dick Dawkins and his Lungfish Disciples.

    ReplyDelete
  3. MKOctober 28, 2009 at 10:54 AM

    Derek:"Poor fools"

    Don't feel bad for them. Mariano here believes that Neanderthals were humans suffering from rickets.


    "Thus spoke Dick Dawkins and his Lungfish Disciples."

    I understand that you try to indicate that Evolution is a religion and thus close the intellectual gap, but I am still waiting for scientists to find any remains/proof of Solomon and David's Kingdom, Exodus, Noachian Flood, census during which Romans decided to order Jews to return to their place of birth (!?)

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousOctober 28, 2009 at 12:06 PM

    Since thats not the domain of scientists but archeologists you'll be waiting for a while.

    ReplyDelete
  5. MKOctober 28, 2009 at 12:23 PM

    "Since thats not the domain of scientists but archeologists you'll be waiting for a while"

    Damn, and me stupid thought archaeologists are scientists. Stupid. Stupid. Oh wait...

    -logy, -logia

    ReplyDelete
  6. DerekOctober 28, 2009 at 2:08 PM

    MK,

    Thanks for distracting the raving fundy atheists from what the point of this post was about! I know it's hard for you guys to have your petty, childish, morally reprehensible wordview shattered, so Im sure they appreciate you spurting out a few atheist one-liners with that air o' superiority vibe thats won you guys so many friends down through the years.
    But more to the point:
    Anyone who advoctes or apologizes for the moron who ran evilbible.com is as big an if not bigger than moron. I guess that makes you. Hmmm...

    As for the poke about Neanderthals, in your universe, it doesn't matter whether the things Mariano, myself, Richard Dawkins or even yourself believe. Doesn't matter at all. Truth isn't a particularly useful ideal for the naturalist.

    But about the bible and archeology. You uneducated summation is both ill-informed as well as juvenial. Do you know how cumbersome ancient historical reasearch can be? I doubt it. Every year more and more information is gathered about ancient Israel. The information currently possesed by historians and archeologist almost across the board either lines up nicely with the biblical accounts or else does nothing either way. Your information is just plain bad. As for thing like the census reported by Luke, some information comes to us from antiquity by way of a single source. That's just the way it is. The skeptic who believes that both the NT and the OT need corroborative evidence for every claim that is made is simply being irrational. In cases where there appears to be conflicting accounts, why can't the Bible be the one reporting correctly over and against the secular sources? After all, from your vantage point, all ancient sources are primative, superstitious idiots who barley muddled through until the enlightenment. Why trust anything they say?

    There are however, some points of contact here. With archeology, the process is always changing because of variables. Human interaction with artifacts, politics, the elements, the ruthless advace of time, that all effect the finds as we can access and catalogue them. This is only across about 5,000 years of earth history were the bulk of the variation occurs because of the precense and action of intelligent agents.

    There exists no parallel with the theory of evolution. An entire world historical record, mostly static, with 99.9999% of the evidence missing?! Compared to the OT and the NT, I'd say your the one who's hoping against hope pal.

    Peace

    btw, "scientist" is a blanket term. It doesn't apply to all fields of inquiry (like archeology) simply because it has "ology" at the end of it.

    ReplyDelete
  7. MKOctober 28, 2009 at 2:56 PM

    "Anyone who advoctes or apologizes for the moron who ran evilbible.com is as big an if not bigger than moron."

    How about guy who apologizes for the moron who believes Neanderthals are humans with rickets?


    "As for the poke about Neanderthals, in your universe, it doesn't matter whether the things Mariano, myself, Richard Dawkins or even yourself believe. Doesn't matter at all. Truth isn't a particularly useful ideal for the naturalist."

    I hope you are joking. It doesn't matter if the guy is wrong?

    "The information currently possesed by historians and archeologist almost across the board either lines up nicely with the biblical accounts or else does nothing either way."

    Here you are wrong. All of the serious (also Israeli) archaeologists would agree with me (about Solomon+David's kingdoms, Exodus etc).
    There is no evidence for any of those and there should be plenty. They were all large scale events which should leave lots of archaeological evidence.

    "Compared to the OT and the NT, I'd say your the one who's hoping against hope pal."

    Your analogy is incorrect.

    Exodus example: I am not asking you to name all of the Jews participating in Exodus (your analogy to 99.999% of record missing).

    I am asking to provide ANY evidence for ANYONE conducting Exodus-like activity at approx. time the Bible says it happened. There is none.

    The same goes with Solomon's kingdom. We know there were other political entities present at the same area at that time and none of them recorded large Kingdom of Israel.

    "btw, "scientist" is a blanket term. It doesn't apply to all fields of inquiry (like archeology) simply because it has "ology" at the end of it."

    C'mon Derek. You have shot yourself in the foot with that "archaeologist are not scientists" comment and you know it (if anonymous is you).

    And I agree about not every "-logy" belongs to science, but archeology does.

    ReplyDelete
  8. MKOctober 28, 2009 at 3:11 PM

    "As for thing like the census reported by Luke, some information comes to us from antiquity by way of a single source."

    Point about census I have missed.

    I have said: "census during which Romans decided to order [male] Jews to return to their place of birth"

    I am not arguing there should be historical record of that census (many records are in fact missing)

    I am saying that it is virtually impossible that Roman Empire would order all the Jews to just drop everything they were doing (during relative peace time) and travel long distances to their place of birth.

    It is especially strange since Romans were "all about taxation" (to put it politely).

    I have always found this story to be very strange. It can only be explain by the fact that authors of the Bible were trying to establish connection between Jesus and House of David (through Joseph) and probably just made that census up or misrepresented real census.

    ReplyDelete
  9. DerekOctober 28, 2009 at 6:29 PM

    “How about guy who apologizes for the moron who believes Neanderthals are humans with rickets?”

    Again, for you, who cares?! Why should we care? Truth means nothing to you, or at least it shouldn’t if you are being honest.

    ”I hope you are joking. It doesn't matter if the guy is wrong?”

    Hm, I see you still don’t get it. It does matter to me. Because I believe that truth matters, because I believe there are moral dimensions involved. Because I believe those moral dimensions are real and binding, not metaphysical abstractions: (Lying=bad Truth=good). You don not have this privilege.

    ”Here you are wrong. All of the serious (also Israeli) archaeologists would agree with me (about Solomon+David's kingdoms, Exodus etc).
    There is no evidence for any of those and there should be plenty. They were all large scale events which should leave lots of archaeological evidence.
    Again, YOU are wrong. Sadly, you have no idea what you are talking about. Serious archeologists? You mean the archeologists who agree with your position. Mind you there are quite a few who do not (Sauer, Bimson, McGovern, Fields, Wood, Oswalt, Kitchen, Albright, Hess, Glueck, Shanks, Wright, Yamauchi, Maier, Clendensen, Block), and if you think these issues aren’t hotly debated by scholars of the ANE and Israeli history, you’re nuts! The so-called “new-archeologist” movement gained some ground for about the last 30-40 years, but this movement, largely based around the active DESIRE to undermine the OT, has been seriously challenged the whole way, and is losing ground rapidly today.

    Heck, even some of the key proponents of new-archeology admit data that radically undermines their opinions. Israel Finkelstein in his Living on the Fringe (pg 27-30) documents a number of ancient nomadic people groups who are know solely from literary sources. As well as virtually admitting that there are huge regions of the Holy Land that have not been seriously investigated. Again from Finkelstein,

    “Most of the Sinai peninsula, the Hejaz and Edom and a significant part of the Negev have never been surveyed. Surprisingly enough, even the Beersheeva Valley, in which almost every known Bronze and Iron Age site has been excavated, has never been thoroughly and systematically surveyed. Random visits by the author to several sites in this area revealed new material and demonstrate the need for such an undertaking."

    Finkelstein finds this crap just walking around and he’s claiming there is not enough data? Hmmmmm
    As for inscriptions, what about the same for other Levantine kingdoms? Aram-Damascus is missing 200 years of its history. So far, Damascus has furnished no Iron Age inscriptions whatsoever. From all the kings of Moab, a mere one inscription exists today for Mesha, for Ammon only three small ones and for Edom, none. Shanks notes evidence of interaction between Egyptian and a Jerusalem ‘king’ as early as the 14th century BCE as well as asking, "We have the literary evidence, but on the basis of no evidence are you going to conclude that there was no Jerusalem in the 14th century," There’s the grand point, no evidence? I have about 1500 pages in my Bible that say your nuts.

    You’re simply not recognizing the serious disasters that befell Jerusalem and Samaria several times in its history. Or other possible social-historical factors that are in play here. Again I cannot over-emphasize the impotency of you assessments thus far.

    continued....

    ReplyDelete
  10. DerekOctober 28, 2009 at 6:30 PM

    ”Your analogy is incorrect.

    Exodus example: I am not asking you to name all of the Jews participating in Exodus (your analogy to 99.999% of record missing).
    I am asking to provide ANY evidence for ANYONE conducting Exodus-like activity at approx. time the Bible says it happened. There is none.
    The same goes with Solomon's kingdom. We know there were other political entities present at the same area at that time and none of them recorded large Kingdom of Israel.”

    Again your impotent knowledge of archeology and ancient historiography is shining through. But the analogy is right on. I’m talking about 4 billion years of natural, unintelligent activity. Were is the evidence? There is none. Even asking for what your asking form, your still showing unbridled skepticism and irrationally high standards as far as archeology goes. Typical.

    ”C'mon Derek. You have shot yourself in the foot with that "archaeologist are not scientists" comment and you know it (if anonymous is you).”

    Ha! First of all, I ain’t anon. Second, I’ve only shot myself in the foot if you or anyone else thinks that only serious research is done by people who MUST be labeled scientists. (I didn’t realize that word had so much power!) Historians are not scientists. Philosophers are not scientists. Theologians are not scientists. Each one engages in and maybe does science at points, but they are NOT (yes even archeologists) scientists.

    ”And I agree about not every "-logy" belongs to science, but archeology does.”
    You wish. And it’s “ology”, not “logy”

    ”Point about census I have missed. I have said: "census during which Romans decided to order [male] Jews to return to their place of birth" I am not arguing there should be historical record of that census (many records are in fact missing) “
    Hm, since you recognize there are records missing from 1st century CE, I have to wonder why you have such a stroke about records missing from 10th-14th BCE. Go figure. You said, “but I am still waiting for scientists to find any remains/proof of…………….census during which Romans decided to order Jews to return to their place of birth”. How does that not sound like your making the argument that there is no extra-biblical record for the Lukan census?

    “I am saying that it is virtually impossible that Roman Empire would order all the Jews to just drop everything they were doing (during relative peace time) and travel long distances to their place of birth.
    It is especially strange since Romans were "all about taxation" (to put it politely).”
    Virtually impossible? That’s pretty succinct. I guess I’d be a fool to question you, a 21st century lay-skeptic, since it also appears you have had no idea what you have been talking about up to this point.

    I guess there goes the battle of Thermopylae, Hannibal crossing the Alps, Mount Vesuvius eruption. It is not the least improbable, much less impossible! The “census” was in fact a “registration” and was done all the time in the ancient world. I’m quite sure Caesar Augustus didn’t give a crap about what the Jews were doing. You also seem to be under the impression that this would have been a, “do it now and get it done!” thing. It wasn’t. The whole operation would have taken place over a 2-5 year period.

    ”I have always found this story to be very strange. It can only be explain by the fact that authors of the Bible were trying to establish connection between Jesus and House of David (through Joseph) and probably just made that census up or misrepresented real census.”

    “It can only be explained”? You seem very confident of your opinions. Not a hallmark of a good historian/exegete. It’s impossible that Jesus’ father was a descendant of David? Why? Just cause it is? That’s no argument. Evidence man. Not assertions. I know it’s easier to just believe things with no evidence, but the real worlds just not like that.

    peace

    ReplyDelete
  11. kh123October 30, 2009 at 3:54 AM

    {Aimed at MK, who conveniently overlooked the facts provided above on how evolutionism, materialism, and antichristianity made a swell bedfellow with Uncle Adolf.}

    "I understand that you try to indicate that Evolution is a religion and thus close the intellectual gap..."

    Well, not much of a gap to close - those who posit for magical lungfish and Campbells Prebiotic Soup (with 5 new amino acid flavors) don't necessarily boast an impressive array of logic skills when it comes to this subject.

    "...but I am still waiting for scientists to find any remains/proof of Solomon and David's Kingdom, Exodus, Noachian Flood, census during which Romans decided to order Jews to return to their place of birth (!?)"


    Ah, such awesome skepticism. Given that yardstick for understanding evidence, and since you've written off archaeology and observational science already (except of course when it posits "Babylonian origin" conspiracy theories and magical lungfish - then it's acceptable to you, right?)... Given your pre-commitment to disbelieve anything Biblically supportive from archaeology, biology, or geology, no amount of evidence would do. But hey, look - all of those organisms (some perfectly articulated) wholly preserved in-situ, in alluvial deposits, en masse, with their organic matrix replaced by unusual chemical processes - that's not evidence of a massive continental diluvial catastrophe. Noooo...

    And, in relation to your last request ("census during which Romans decided to order Jews to return to their place of birth (!?)") - let's be honest after all, since we're taking the Maher/Streicher approach: We'd probably scoff at the idea that a powerful foreign goy empire would invade a well established Jewish community or "Dynasty" (of which "little to no evidence remains" - maybe because much of it was "burned to ashes" by interested parties?).

    Furthermore, we'd laugh at the idea that this foreign power would force levies and taxes upon this Juden Dynasty and its population, as well as forcing them into administrative peculiarities (such as reporting back to their hometowns - or "ghettoes" maybe? - for a census, even if several days' journey by foot).

    And - why not? - we might even make a hilarious docudrama (enter: Julius Maher) about how inconceivable it'd be that this "Roman Empire" would go so far as to burn those Jews' books and synagogues whenever those sons of Abraham got uppity. Or that the powers-that-be would hold Jewish citizens hostage for ever-increasing ransoms. Or even completely deport the entire population, in turn uprooting Jewish cemeteries and making them into local parks....

    I mean, how unbelievable is that, ah? No modern analog of *that* has ever taken place, right?... (Aleksandrow Lodzki, Poland, 1939 - recorded in The Encyclopedia Judaica.)


    Perhaps this is why we Jews make a point of recording what happens. Since it all tends to sound so far-fetched to untrained (and spoiled) ears that have no experience with suffering. (Two towers crashing to the ground, anybody? Who's going to believe that?...)

    BTW, enjoy reading those Rutgers OSS/Nuremberg PDF's - let us all know what you think of the Reich's Master Plan to eliminate the Christian churches when you're done.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)