No. Stox has used this before, but this isn't a correct application of the fallacy, because there is nothing in the Christian theology that supports Hitler's words and actions. If in fact Hitler's actions are patently not Christian, by reference to an acceptable source that reasonable people would say is authoritative - say, the Bible - then to deny Hitler's Christianity by saying "no true Christian" would do such a thing isn't fallacious. Because no true Christian would, according to commonly accepted standards. Stox's religious war against religion gets the better of him, I'm afraid, in that he beclouds his ability to objectively judge and leads him to make errors. My personal opinion, of course.
I'm not saying he was a good christian or that he followed christian doctrine entirely. but what "christian" does? He believed in jesus, He believed in god and he believed jesus was the son of god. So he was a christian.
Totally erroneous, Hitler did not have a relationship with Jesus, which makes a person to have a supernatural, born again, life changing experience, which is ultimately the salvation process. To be a Christian isnt about saying you are a Christian, its about a life altering heart change that only comes through a personal relationship with God. Go examine yourself.
He believed Jesus was a weakling, and held very strongly to Nietzchean philosophy. There isn't a single thing, outside of him being born into catholicism, and his use of "mission" to justify his implementation of the holocaust, to support the view he was a Christian; there is nothing in Christian theology to support his words or actions. His purported admiration of a ""positive Christianity" is no more "Christianity" than Christian identity, or any other ridiculous misrepresentations. Again, reliance on what reasonable people would call a commonly accepted authority, would be the basis for judgment, not whether the man skews words to fit an agenda. A tortured skewing of the facts in the extreme, in my opinion, and an illogical application of the no true scotsman fallacy.
How do you know what relationship hitler had with jesus? You just don't like the idea of hitler being one of your lot, But the fact is, he was. all you are doing now is changing the criteria to try and exclude him. According to northpointaiki he wasn't a christian because he didn't entirely follow christian doctrine, According to you he wasn't a christian because he didn't have a supernatural life changing experience, Though how you know that is a complete mystery.
Stox really does make me laugh. In my opinion, his religious fervor reaches to such lengths, to the ends of absolute illogical applications of the fallacies he employs, when it is patently obvious to reasonable minds, atheist or not, that this is, to put it bluntly, a steaming pile of doggy-doo-doo. Hitler's "Christianity" is no more Christianity than that of the KKK, Christian Identity, or any other of a host of bullshit organizations and creeds that have appropriated the life and words, as they are reported, anyway, in the one Christian text, of a Jew whose life was recorded to be a life espousing selflessness, compassion, and love, even to the point of forgiving one's enemies. A Jew held up as a beacon, a Nordic Avenger against the evils of global Judaica. Yep, pure Christianity - any reasonable mind can see that. But Stox will reach for whatever thread he can, no matter how tenuously founded or extremely tortured in construction, so long as it fits a preconceived notion, in my opinion, of his own perversion of atheism.
Or perhaps hitlers christianity is as christian as the inquisition or the crusades. Just because you don't see people of all colours holding hands and singing wishy washy songs about love when you look at it doesn't mean it aint' christianity. It's not like christianity has a history of peace north. So why would it be so unbelievable that a mass murderer would be a christian? Given their track record when it comes to killing people hitler should fit right in. i guess it depends what bits of the bible you identify with when you read it. all4Christ identified with the nice bits, Hitler identified with jesus' fight against "jewish poison". Each to his own.
Again, dancing wildly except to the heart of the obvious. Reliance on a commonly accepted authoritative source. That man has fucked up everything in the name of religion doesn't mean any of the actions Stox leaps to salaciously are "Christian." Find support for them in the Christian text, and Stox will have something. Repeat the religious mantra of atheism against Christianity, and all I see is fanaticism. Beyond this, an appeal to commonsense (lost, I'm guessing, to Stox), but I will say it again - what part of: -is difficult to grasp as just a bit dodgy, since Jesus was himself a Jew? A Jew recast as a Nordic Warrior by the Nazi Regime, the 12 lost tribes of Israel recast as 12 lost tribes from Northern Europe by Christian Identity. Yep, sure, pure Christianity. Anyway, this atheist, agnostic, whatever fits, is off to my favorite religious activity, hours lost in the aisles of my favorite, dusty old used book store. I'll leave the atheist preaching to my pal.
Yeh jesus was a jew, So was hitler and most of the Nazi officials. What's your point? if your argument is "hitler killed jews, jesus was a jew, Therefor hitler wouldn't have liked jesus", Well, i don't think i need to point out why that is flawed.
Makes me laugh how stOx puts words in other people's mouths and then tries to point out the flaws in "their" thinking....LOL He tried that with me several times before in other threads....Hmmm...maybe this one too along time ago
Hitler's "Jewishness" is a speculation based on a possible relationship of Schickelgruber, Sr. with a Jewess housekeeper, never beyond mere speculation, much less probability, much less proof. This is the science our Man of Atheism (big letters, just so you know it's true) depends on to make his rock-solid claims. I'm in awe of the rigors of the line of analysis. Uh, I know it's really difficult to grasp, but, uh, no, my insightful friend, the "positive Christian" that existed during the Nazi regime, to the extent they did (most were just atheists, or some bizarre cacophony of nordic pagan longings) turned the Jewish Christ into a Nordic personnage, a vision of an Avenging Angel against the Jews. Much like the Christian Identity turned the 12 lost tribes of the Bible into 12 lost tribes from Northern Europe. Man, with the rigors of Stox's scholarship, I don't know why folks don't just lay down in abject terror at the intellectual gotterdammerung before them.
Is your argument "hitler killed jews, jesus was a jew, Therefor hitler wouldn't have liked jesus" or not? because if it is you should know that 2 field marshals and 15 generals in hitlers army were jews, Known practicing jews. 20 known jews were awarded the Knight's Cross, The highest honour in the german army. Goering publicly defended having an observant jew as a field marshal in the german army stating "I decide who is a jew". The argument that Hitler hated all jews and as such wouldnt be a christian is simply invalid.
My argument, which contains numerous elements, has already been laid out several times, so I won't repeat it. Please provide proof of your statements in the second paragraph.
Fascinating link, thanks for the information. I do know the Nuremberg Laws were incredibly convoluted, with the logic of "Jewishness" being a fascinating look into dissemblance in service of a sick ideology. I also know that as the war surged towards its bloody end, every pragmatic concern went out the door, and Hitler's regime moved further and further into its own mire. This is telling: http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?isbn=0700611789 I don't see how it relates, however, to your linking Hitler, Nazism, and Christianity. The "Positive Christianity" of the Nazi Regime turned the historical Jesus into something and someone quite different from what he was, by all accounts: And I think it is important, too, to distinguish whatever Hitler may have said for whatever may have helped his rise to power, from what he felt. In private, especially, it seems pretty clear to me. None of this matters, however. A man may make any claim as to what he is or isn't. The way out of the circular loop is by reliance on an authority commonly accepted by reasonable people as such. I would ask, yet again, for Biblical proof that Hitler's words and deeds were in line with the Christian ideal. Absent that, I would say, as I said and have maintained throughout, your reliance on the No True Scotsman fallacy is itself fallacious.
Now now north. Let's continue refuting my claims before starting on your own strawmen. I was making no link between nazism and christianity. The link i was making was between hitler and a belief in christianity. That's quite an unfair request to make. For me to answer i would need to re-read the bible entirely while thinking like a nazi. What i can do though is give quotes from "Mein Kampf" and "my new order" where Hitler referenced biblical passages and described how he felt it was in line with the christian ideal and specifically how he compared his acts with that of jesus'. You can argue that those verses that hitler was referencing weren't about killing jews and i would agree. But according to hitlers interpretation of the bible what he was doing was perfectly in-line with christianity. And at times (in the last quote) He says he would "be no christian" if he did not "as did our lord" turn against jews. Hitlers interpretation of christianity, The struggle of Jesus and the jews role in society, According to him, Made his actions not only acceptable, But necessary, noble and "what jesus would do". What hitler done was no different to what the christians on this forum do and what you are guilty of right now. He read the bible in the light of himself. Like i have always maintained, A good person can read the bible and see only good, but you don't need much of an imagination if you are a psychopath to read the bible and find justification for absolute horror. You can't say someone isn't a "true christian" just because their interpretation of text is different than yours or they focused on passages that you would have otherwise dismissed entirely.
Freudian Slip? Go read a history book. Centuries past is littered with instances of christians killing. Who do you think were responsible for the crusades? If we were to believe every lie told by religious people trying to rewrite history we would have this picture of all religions sitting around holding hand and singing Kum Ba Yah instead of the reality which is bloodshed and torture in the name of their oh so peaceful religion.