I must say that this is another one that I enjoy from Dr. Avalos and it does make one think, however I think the Dr. oversimplifies his argument in certain instances.
I've heard his debates and read his posts on this site. He asserts that because Luther representing Christianity had it out to replace the worship system of Israel, that those thoughts automatically link and were ample motive or support for Hitler's vision in which he said God was his motivator.
Now, quite naturally, I have a few problems with what the Dr. asserts simply because I know, that not everyone that name Christ, actually follows and or believes Christ and or the bible. Certainly, contrary to the suggestions of Avalos, Hitler was not a Christian.
Did he have regard for Christianity? He seemed to have regard for the basis of moral values found within religion as a type of marker or foundation for the masses. So religion to him was a "poor man's" necessity to at least bring him to a sense of right and wrong. However, he thought of himself as God and his followers worshipped him and he thoroughly mixed the beliefs of evolution in with his belief system.
I see why Christians claim that he was atheistic in his belief system because he wasn't Christian or any other religious system for that matter, and he based his ideologies on humanism.
IE: I don't see where Hitler needed the bible to do what he did, however he used it and tenets of it to his advantage...but to make the argument that the bible or belief in GOd or even biblically based teachings of Luther, was the responsible factor in what he did is pure fantasy.
That's where I get off the road with the good Dr. Evolution was talked about years before the book was written and historically Darwin wasn't the first to espouse his ideas. So for Dr. Avalos to refer to supposed Christian prior to 1950 & 51 before "Origin Of The Species" was written, then claim that Hitler's thoughts could not have come as a result of evolutionary thought is totally disengenuous.
What we already know is that the social evolutionary thought of the day, which was being turned into the biological evolutionary science, prevailed. Stating things to the contrary are not arguments made in good faith.
I mean that just because the book wasn't written, does not mean that thoughts that the book espoused did not exist...Every one of you have been proud to say that Darwin wasn't the father of his ideology. Darwin's father even espoused the idea of evolution and society certainly functioned from a social evolutionary standpoint.
Hitler may not have mentioned Darwin, but he clearly mentions the ideas espoused by Darwin against the biblical teaching of the day.
Anyway, the other 2 posts are good also, but I still think the Dr.'s argument hinges on a very thin layer of Plexiglas.
One thing I will agree with...even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian that doesn't make Christianity wrong or ineffectual or inherently bad. He would have perverted Christianity like David Koresh did. Now if he was an atheist I would say the same. I don't claim taht atheist simply believe in all out murder or such the like. Although we are dealing with how worldviews effect the perceived value of humanity in general.
I deleted the last comment it was incorrect. Thanks.
Hello, Mr. Burnett, Thanks for your comments. I will address at least some of them, but I must ask if you have actually read the relevant chapter in The Christian Delusion (you mention you’ve heard my debates and posts, but do not mention if you have read the actual chapter).
I ask because I do address some of the claims you raise there (e.g., Hitler was not really a Christian). If you have read that chapter, then could you explain why Hitler’s “Positive Christianity” cannot be counted as “Christian”?
If you had read the chapter, then you also would see that your representation of my position on Luther is patently false:
“He asserts that because Luther representing Christianity had it out to replace the worship system of Israel, that those thoughts automatically link and were ample motive or support for Hitler's vision in which he said God was his motivator.”
I argue that Luther’s 7-point plan for the Jews is parallel to that implemented by the Nazis down to very specific details. I cited Luther to demonstrate that Darwinism was not needed to conceive anything the Nazis did because Luther had already thought of it hundreds of years before Darwin.
I don’t recall mentioning that there was any link because Luther wanted to replace the worship system of Israel. Could you provide a precise quote where I say that?
So my questions again:
1. Have you read the relevant chapter in the Christian Delusion?
2. If so, why do you not count what Nazis called “Positive Christianity” as Christian?
3 comments:
Hector has had it bad these last few months, first with the flooding of the Mississippi and then by being hospitalized twice with pneumonia.
So glad you're doing better Hector. We need you!
John,
I must say that this is another one that I enjoy from Dr. Avalos and it does make one think, however I think the Dr. oversimplifies his argument in certain instances.
I've heard his debates and read his posts on this site. He asserts that because Luther representing Christianity had it out to replace the worship system of Israel, that those thoughts automatically link and were ample motive or support for Hitler's vision in which he said God was his motivator.
Now, quite naturally, I have a few problems with what the Dr. asserts simply because I know, that not everyone that name Christ, actually follows and or believes Christ and or the bible. Certainly, contrary to the suggestions of Avalos, Hitler was not a Christian.
Did he have regard for Christianity? He seemed to have regard for the basis of moral values found within religion as a type of marker or foundation for the masses. So religion to him was a "poor man's" necessity to at least bring him to a sense of right and wrong. However, he thought of himself as God and his followers worshipped him and he thoroughly mixed the beliefs of evolution in with his belief system.
I see why Christians claim that he was atheistic in his belief system because he wasn't Christian or any other religious system for that matter, and he based his ideologies on humanism.
IE: I don't see where Hitler needed the bible to do what he did, however he used it and tenets of it to his advantage...but to make the argument that the bible or belief in GOd or even biblically based teachings of Luther, was the responsible factor in what he did is pure fantasy.
That's where I get off the road with the good Dr. Evolution was talked about years before the book was written and historically Darwin wasn't the first to espouse his ideas. So for Dr. Avalos to refer to supposed Christian prior to 1950 & 51 before "Origin Of The Species" was written, then claim that Hitler's thoughts could not have come as a result of evolutionary thought is totally disengenuous.
What we already know is that the social evolutionary thought of the day, which was being turned into the biological evolutionary science, prevailed. Stating things to the contrary are not arguments made in good faith.
I mean that just because the book wasn't written, does not mean that thoughts that the book espoused did not exist...Every one of you have been proud to say that Darwin wasn't the father of his ideology. Darwin's father even espoused the idea of evolution and society certainly functioned from a social evolutionary standpoint.
Hitler may not have mentioned Darwin, but he clearly mentions the ideas espoused by Darwin against the biblical teaching of the day.
Anyway, the other 2 posts are good also, but I still think the Dr.'s argument hinges on a very thin layer of Plexiglas.
One thing I will agree with...even if Hitler claimed to be a Christian that doesn't make Christianity wrong or ineffectual or inherently bad. He would have perverted Christianity like David Koresh did. Now if he was an atheist I would say the same. I don't claim taht atheist simply believe in all out murder or such the like. Although we are dealing with how worldviews effect the perceived value of humanity in general.
I deleted the last comment it was incorrect. Thanks.
Hello, Mr. Burnett,
Thanks for your comments. I will address at least some of them, but I must ask if you have actually read the relevant chapter in The Christian Delusion (you mention you’ve heard my debates and posts, but do not mention if you have read the actual chapter).
I ask because I do address some of the claims you raise there (e.g., Hitler was not really a Christian). If you have read that chapter, then could you explain why Hitler’s “Positive Christianity” cannot be counted as “Christian”?
If you had read the chapter, then you also would see that your representation of my position on Luther is patently false:
“He asserts that because Luther representing Christianity had it out to replace the worship system of Israel, that those thoughts automatically link and were ample motive or support for Hitler's vision in which he said God was his motivator.”
I argue that Luther’s 7-point plan for the Jews is parallel to that implemented by the Nazis down to very specific details. I cited Luther to demonstrate that Darwinism was not needed to conceive anything the Nazis did because Luther had already thought of it hundreds of years before Darwin.
I don’t recall mentioning that there was any link because Luther wanted to replace the worship system of Israel. Could you provide a precise quote where I say that?
So my questions again:
1. Have you read the relevant chapter in the Christian Delusion?
2. If so, why do you not count what Nazis called “Positive Christianity” as Christian?
Post a Comment