SPOILERS Thud! Discussion *Spoilers*
- Thread starter Tonyblack
- Start date
You believe Wiki???
I read books written by people who have experts ... I also have a DVD Nazi's A Warning From History ... and that say's that he believed in Evolution and the Darwin theory of Weak die strong survive live - He funded propaganda movies stating Darwin sensibilities (though misrepresented - and remember I am saying that as a believer in God!)
Hitler may have put on a Catholic front but his inner beliefs were more in line with Darwin than with the Church.
I read books written by people who have experts ... I also have a DVD Nazi's A Warning From History ... and that say's that he believed in Evolution and the Darwin theory of Weak die strong survive live - He funded propaganda movies stating Darwin sensibilities (though misrepresented - and remember I am saying that as a believer in God!)
Hitler may have put on a Catholic front but his inner beliefs were more in line with Darwin than with the Church.
Yes I do believe Wiki.
And I believe the Albert Speer quote is correct too.
And the John Toland quote.
And the Ian Kershaw quote.
It would be terribly convenient for a Christian to claim Hitler was a Darwinian atheist, because that would explain his atrocities.
Next you'll be saying that Bush was an atheist too. 8)
And I believe the Albert Speer quote is correct too.
And the John Toland quote.
And the Ian Kershaw quote.
It would be terribly convenient for a Christian to claim Hitler was a Darwinian atheist, because that would explain his atrocities.
Next you'll be saying that Bush was an atheist too. 8)
Pooh - just because it's in Wiki doesn't make it absolutely cast iron 'god's honest truth' :twisted: 
Hitler was a mad tart and he'd go anywhere to get support until he didn't need it anymore. Rather like the Catholic Church in fact as they played both ends against the middle and fence-sat until their arse-groove came up to their chin during Hitler's entire Chancellorship let alone WW2. The man repudiated his whole upbringing more or less and allowed the atrocities during his leadership which hardly follows a good Christian life let alone a Catholic one which as we know is rather more 'flexible' on the subject.
If - and it's a big one! 8) the Vatican had had any kind of a backbone during the 1930's they'd have at least been slapping cautions and bulls on him at a rate of knots up to the point of ex-communication. Hitler believed in a kind of god, but it was definitely of the OT persuasion and not a 'love thy neighbour' in sight. Jesus would have lasted about 2 minutes in the Himmler's Aryan wonderland - in fact about the same survival span as Hitler, since he was hardly a natural blond and definitely wouldn't have had matching collar and cuffs :twisted:
In fact that's the key to it all - if he was anything Hitler belonged to the Church of Megalomania. It's a newish ecumenical schism in fact - and Bush and Bin Laden belong in it too :twisted:
Hitler was a mad tart and he'd go anywhere to get support until he didn't need it anymore. Rather like the Catholic Church in fact as they played both ends against the middle and fence-sat until their arse-groove came up to their chin during Hitler's entire Chancellorship let alone WW2. The man repudiated his whole upbringing more or less and allowed the atrocities during his leadership which hardly follows a good Christian life let alone a Catholic one which as we know is rather more 'flexible' on the subject.
If - and it's a big one! 8) the Vatican had had any kind of a backbone during the 1930's they'd have at least been slapping cautions and bulls on him at a rate of knots up to the point of ex-communication. Hitler believed in a kind of god, but it was definitely of the OT persuasion and not a 'love thy neighbour' in sight. Jesus would have lasted about 2 minutes in the Himmler's Aryan wonderland - in fact about the same survival span as Hitler, since he was hardly a natural blond and definitely wouldn't have had matching collar and cuffs :twisted:
In fact that's the key to it all - if he was anything Hitler belonged to the Church of Megalomania. It's a newish ecumenical schism in fact - and Bush and Bin Laden belong in it too :twisted:
If I read that correctly, you are saying that you are a creationist and you don't believe in evolution, yet you are using Darwin to "prove" your point.
And you call them Darwin "sensibilities" ie; they are sensible.
And Jan, if the wiki article was incorrect, don't you think someone would have pointed that out? Is the Albert Speer quote untrue?
And you call them Darwin "sensibilities" ie; they are sensible.
And Jan, if the wiki article was incorrect, don't you think someone would have pointed that out? Is the Albert Speer quote untrue?
I didn't say it was incorrect. I asked if you accepted everything you read in there as 100% true I believe? I didn't even bother reading the stupid article - everyone knows Hitler was madder than the Mad Hatter. Creationism v Darwinism is not the point in this because it's just a reason that justifies war. You can take isolated sentences out of any load of old tripe or the most thoroughly researched scientific paper (like The Descent of Man) and make sense of the maddest staements in some context or other. You of all people should know that!
It all depends on what angle you're coming at it. Hitler supported/enabled genetic experiementation in the concentration camps and elsewhere. Mengele in a certain light was a bloody genius in the work he did with genetics - is that consonant with the traditional christian faiths. No it isn't because they're fiddling with creation - so Lady V's right in her assessment that Hitler accepted evolutionary theories to the point where he authorised genetic experiments on human being in barbaric conditions... 
Evolution is accepted by the Catholics now and has been for some years BTW - I was taught by nuns in primary school about ammonites, dinosaurs and how coalfields were formed. Religion does change and the Catholics are great at compromise in the face of losing good little followers and will always seem as though they're backing the favourite - like with Hitler during the war...
:twisted:And yeah - back on subject smartypants!
Jan Van Quirm said:
I didn't say it was incorrect. I asked if you accepted everything you read in there as 100% true I believe? I didn't even bother reading the stupid article - everyone knows Hitler was madder than the Mad Hatter.
).However I do have a 99% trust in wikipedia. Is that so wrong?
By your same argument, Bush couldn't possibly be a Christian because he was madder than the Mad Hatter, yet I believe he claims to be a Christian. Same with Sarah Palin and a lot of other US TV evangelists. If they're Christians, then Christianity is doomed.
Bush and Palin I'd say were nutters and bad christians, in the round, in most sensible people's book - to someone outside of their narrow interpretation of how christians are supposed to behave anyway. So is the Pope/Vatican come to that on a political basis in terms of compormised to the hilt, although this pope 'repents' being part of the Hitler Youth movement back in the 1940s. It's hard to stick up for your beliefs sometimes - look what happened to Jesus?
Some atheists/pagans are as bad as bad christians - it's all about oppression and pushing something at people to make them do as they're told. Or forcing them to behave in the way you want to the extent of killing them or sending them off on a jolly old crusade.
You believe in wiki 99%
Some people believe in Bible (both books) 99% and their other 1% is faith
You have your 1% for something else no doubt (buying TP 1st editions? )
If you believe in science even that's still fallible - it's only as good as the data and new data comes in all the time. That's as true in Darwin's Watch as it is Astrophysics - nothing is absolute fact except maybe that water freezes at 0 deg C and boils at 100 deg C ).
But actions speak louder than words and belief - people who get other people killed for their own advancement are not 'good'. Period.
You don't need any belief as a human being to see the logic of that - whatever belief the killers claim to belong too...
It's hard to stick up for your beliefs sometimes - look what happened to Jesus? Some atheists/pagans are as bad as bad christians - it's all about oppression and pushing something at people to make them do as they're told. Or forcing them to behave in the way you want to the extent of killing them or sending them off on a jolly old crusade.
You believe in wiki 99%
Some people believe in Bible (both books) 99% and their other 1% is faith
You have your 1% for something else no doubt (buying TP 1st editions?
)If you believe in science even that's still fallible - it's only as good as the data and new data comes in all the time. That's as true in Darwin's Watch as it is Astrophysics - nothing is absolute fact except maybe that water freezes at 0 deg C and boils at 100 deg C
). But actions speak louder than words and belief - people who get other people killed for their own advancement are not 'good'. Period.
You don't need any belief as a human being to see the logic of that - whatever belief the killers claim to belong too...
Thursday I missed this, you started the "thud" discussion, I love that book, and I didn't notice
I read the first page and was interested in the discussion, but since I don't have much time at work I went straight to the 4th.. now I can't bring myself to read back to discover how you went from Thud and Tawnee to religion and Hitler...
I read the first page and was interested in the discussion, but since I don't have much time at work I went straight to the 4th.. now I can't bring myself to read back to discover how you went from Thud and Tawnee to religion and Hitler...
Maybe because of Godwin's law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law
(stupid link won't work properly )
(stupid link won't work properly
)
Sorry Crys It started along the lines of how Thud is more a racial or cultural conflict one, as raisindot was saying, rather than a religious jihad. Somehow Creationism and Evolution got mentioned and comparisons were made and off we went on how Hitler could say he was a christian (catholic), but was also fostered genetic experiments that were supported by corrupted rascist views in evolutionary terms.
Valid points have been made on how the 2 views are not mutually exclusive, nor indeed polarised, as some people were trying to argue for. We'd more or less exhausted that line of argument when you came back in so hopefully the debate can get back to Thud the book and not the Holy War.
It started along the lines of how Thud is more a racial or cultural conflict one, as raisindot was saying, rather than a religious jihad. Somehow Creationism and Evolution got mentioned and comparisons were made and off we went on how Hitler could say he was a christian (catholic), but was also fostered genetic experiments that were supported by corrupted rascist views in evolutionary terms.Valid points have been made on how the 2 views are not mutually exclusive, nor indeed polarised, as some people were trying to argue for. We'd more or less exhausted that line of argument when you came back in so hopefully the debate can get back to Thud the book and not the Holy War.
Sjoerd3000 said:
Maybe because of Godwin's law http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%s_law
(stupid link won't work properly )
(stupid link won't work properly
)
I've repaired the links by substituting a % for the apostrophe.
