Indeed. He was a well known loving Christian person, full of peace and good will toward all mankind.
Thank God thereâs a game on tonight
It may give time for some quiet reflection and meditation.
4 Likes
Possibly, but I have to say that my experience of talking about the bible with Christians is also that most of them are phenomenally ignorant about the contents of their own book. Iâll stop short of making that a sweeping generalisation but itâs definitely my experience, for what thatâs worth.
Thatâs not how I watch matches 
The simple truth - one that is arrogantly overlooked by atheists - is that ALL groups have it in them to commit horrible acts. It points to something fundamentally flawed in the human condition.
Atheism offers me no answer to that.
Instead, all Iâve seen atheists offer here is some shitty point scoring. Bwaaark⌠look at what this group did!
Itâs a naive take on it.
1 Like
Weâve already done this. He was a Christian.
You might argue he wasnât a good Christian, but he definitely wasnât an atheist, as you suggested.
Itâs a shame your Christian teachings didnât imbue your with the humility to admit you were wrong.
I have read (glancing reads or engrossing) the English translations of the Bible , Qurâan as well as the Hindu scriptures. While I wouldnât be able to remember John chapter 2 verse 17 etc etc ⌠I do have some sort of understandings on what those books are about⌠And I am an agnostic whose leaning towards atheism. I wonât ever be a hardcore athiest(as that in my mind is no different from a religious person who aims to convert the disbelievers into believers)
1 Like
I Believe in Klopp and as such donât get worked up when watching our games.
This is exactly the arrogance he was referring to.
Statements by Hitler:
âChristianity is an invention of sick brainsâ (13 October, 1941)
âSo itâs not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the Churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death,â (14 October 1941).
Whether he was or wasnât doesnât really add much to the discussion. But your statement highlights the certainty in some atheists that often mirrors religious fundamentalism
2 Likes
And to offer my perspective on the conversations I have had with atheists, it rarely unearths an original thought or idea.
They tend to see themselves as more educated and enlightened than people of a religious persuasion, and some may have even read a little Hitchens or Dawkins, as they tend to be the prophets who wrote the revered canon.
That might be where some of the group think comes from, as the same sort of points are regurgitated. It might also be where the arrogance comes from, as the pair of them were/are sneering and unpleasant tits.
I rarely see any humility in the atheists Iâve talked to, and thereâs little to no willingness to seriously countenance why someone might have a sincere religious belief.
Instead, they just want to argue the case, to one degree or another, that people with a sincere religious faith are stupid.
In this thread I have pointed out numerous scientists and mathematicians, throughout history, who were people of sincere religious faith. They made an enormous contribution to our understanding of the world, and still do.
Their faith is a core part of who they are and how they see the world, and it isnât something that is boxed off and separate from the other, more rational parts of their lives, which is what an atheist would have me believe, as they canât understand how a religious person might also be an eminent scientist, for example.
At that point the atheist tries to steer the conversation toward Sky Fairies and the like, as that is comfortable ground from which to attack religion.
1 Like
He made those statements in 1941, when he had become disillusioned with orthodox Christianity and was throwing himself into Norse mythology and weird esoteric cultist ideas.
He rose to power as a Christian.
But he was never - as you still wonât admit - an atheist. Thatâs indisputable.
Iâve never said he was. Like you, Iâve no idea what he was, apart from an evil bastard
Whoâs generalising now?
But we can be sure about what he wasnât.
From what we can tell, the strength of his Christianity went up and down through his life.
He was strongly Christian throughout his rise to power, described himself as a Christian and claimed to be doing gods work. He described Jesus as an âAryan Warriorâ and expressed envy of the Protestant Churchâs privileged position in England. A lot of his rationale for the persecution of Jews were that they were the âKillers of Christâ.
He boasted about ridding Germany of atheist intellectuals, declared atheism as an enemy of the state, and had atheists executed.
Later in his life he sought to reform Christianity to make it more sympathetic to Nazi ideals, and rework the doctrine to expressly support this.
Finally, Hitler had always had an interest in mysticism, mythology and occultism. This bubbled up occasionally, but really came to the fore at the end of his life.
About the only thing I can find that even gets close to the idea that Hitler was an atheist, was the private mutterings of some of his generals as he dabbled with paganism. Obviously paganism isnât atheism, but there you go.
So while Hitlers faith was a bit of a confused mess, he did by most accounts lean very heavily into Christianity, and we can say with absolute certainty that he was not atheist.
Why does this matter? Because itâs still a myth that continually gets coughed up in any discussion like this, and it simply isnât true. There isnât any conversation Iâve had with a religious person that hasnât at some point resorted to this untruth, including this one with @RedOverTheWater, who still canât quite bring himself to admit he was wrong. While accusing me and @Klopptimist of arrogance.
Shall we do Stalin now? 
Lol. No. Letâs do the example I asked about when I reentered the thread.
China. This is an official atheist government. Systematically destroying the religious Uighur people.
Not very nice, is it? Whereâs the sophisticated irreligious enlightenment? I thought atheism was taking us beyond these barbaric ways?
On Hitler Iâm happy to say that whatever religious belief an atheist might try to ascribe to him, itâs more complicated than that. Iâm not aware of any Christian who would hold Hitler up as an example of, or representative of, the religion. Hitler used religion to suit, as other evil people have done.
I thought I had conceded the point before, but if not, I am happy to state that Hitler was not a consistent, dyed in the wool, atheist; just as I would state that nothing he did represented anything good that I see in Christianity.
If we applied a simple test, according to the teaching of Jesus - by their fruit you will know them - then nobody could seriously claim Hitler was a Christian. If they wanted to stick to their guns on that, they are continuing the discussion in bad faith.
Interesting. I didnât know all of this
2 Likes
I believe I addressed this at the time?
China has no official state religion and an prohibition on organised religion. But that does not mean this society is without religion. Itâs actually incredibly religious, commanding the kind of blind faith, zealotry and worship we associate with religion to be directed at the Communist Party.
Hitchins put it best. Whenever you get a supposed âatheistâ state, you find the kind of religious devotion you find on the most religious states. These are not states suffering from an over abundance of reason and critical thinking.
Which is the heart of the problem.
You have your interpretation of Christian doctrine. Hitler had his.
The trouble with the doctrine is that it is endlessly, horribly open to interpretation.
For example, you would claim that slavery is contrary to Christian teachings. A white supremacist in America would say the opposite, and youâd both have legitimacy to your claim.
And it would be so much easier, and so much bloodshed would have been avoided if the bible just said âdonât enslave peopleâ. But it doesnât. It goes into endless details about how to treat slaves, about indentured servitude and so we on. But the most basic statement clarifying Godâs position on the easiest moral position? Nope. The idea that God is fine with slavery is a perfectly legitimate takeaway from the bible - and indeed, slavery advocates and abolitionists claimed religious authority.
Would a clear position in the bible have led to no slavery? Probably not, but it would have made it a lot harder to justify for centuries.
1 Like
No I didnât I said they tend to know it better. The word tend is doing the heavy lifting.
Did you go to a Christian school mascot ?
No thank god. I was confirmed when I was twelve, and used to go to church, but I quite liked the vicar. He encouraged a critical view of faith and church.