Hitler’s Religious Views

[Wahrheitssucher]

.
„Sein Geist aber ist dem wahren Christentum ebenso fremd, wie sein Wesen vor zweitausend Jahren dem großen Gründer der neuen Lehre selber war. Dieser machte allerdings aus seiner Stellung zum jüdischen Volke keinen Hehl und griff, wenn nötig, sogar zur Peitsche, um aus dem Tempel des Herrn diesen Widersacher jeder wirklichen Menschlichkeit hinauszutreiben, der damals wie immer in der Religion nur ein Mittel zu seinem geschäftlichen Fortkommen sah.
Dafür wurde Christus allerdings ans Kreuz geschlagen, während unser heutiges Parteichristentum sich bei Wahlen erniedrigt, um jüdische Stimmen zu erbetteln und nachher mit atheistischen Judenparteien politische Schiebungen zu versuchen – und gegen das eigene Volk.“
~ Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Kapitel 11

TRANSLATION:
Its spirit, however, is just as foreign to true Christianity as its nature was to [Jesus] the great founder of the new doctrine himself two thousand years ago. He, indeed, made no secret of his attitude toward the Jewish people and, when necessary, even took up the whip to drive this opponent of all genuine humanity out of the Temple of the Lord, who then, as always, saw in religion only a means of advancing his commercial interests.
For that, Christ was indeed nailed to the Cross, whereas our present-day Christian political party debases itself during elections in order to beg for Jewish votes and afterward attempts political dealings with atheistic Jewish parties — against its own people.

~ Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Vol. 1 Chapter 11

N.b. „politische Schiebungen“ = "political wheeling and dealing," "backroom political maneuvering".

"Sein Geist aber ist dem wahren Christentum ebenso fremd..." = "[the jewish] spirit, however, is just as foreign to true Christianity..."

The pronoun "sein" ("its") is referring to the subject of the preceding paragraph: the nature of Jewish people.

The rest of the sentence confirms this:
"...wie sein Wesen vor zweitausend Jahren dem großen Gründer der neuen Lehre selber war." = "...just as its nature was foreign to the great founder of the new teaching himself two thousand years ago."

. . . . . .

This might as well ALSO go here, as it refers:
i.) to Hitler,
ii.) to what naive and gullible ‘theology’ students are taught and believe,
ii.) and — finally — to what for 1,800 years has been referred to as ‘Christianity’.

It also refers to something the actual founder of ‘Christianity’ (viz. Saul of Tarsus) wrote to the early gnostic fellowship at Thessalonia.



“…the Jews* [Judeans] killed the Lord Jesus and the prophets, and also drove us out.
They displease God and are hostile to everyone…”
~ 1 Thessalonians 2:14-16

* Ἰουδαίων (Ioudaiōn) = from Iouda / from Judea — i.e. Judaeans

[Wahrheitssucher]

In this speech, Goebbels does not deny they are pagan.

Yes he does.

No need to quote what someone else thinks about his words and argument.
Watch it again and think for yourself.

Please point exactly to where he denies he or the Nazi party is pagan in this speech. He doesn't. …It's literally just not there.

Here: Joe G says that the NSDAP are not pagan but Christian and you can hear that translation of him saying that at 1:06 in this clip of an excerpt from his speech.




Stating that he himself and the NSDAP are Christian is denying that he and they are pagan.

[Wahrheitssucher]

.
Here is a link to a video that was published in December 2012 on the subject of AH’s views on religion.

https://altcensored.com/watch?v=vat2wprB-0U

And here is the introductory info for it:

Much of what's written about the role of Christianity in Third Reich Germany, and about Hitler's views on religion, is grossly distorted or just plain wrong. The official program of Hitler's National Socialist Party expressed support for "positive Christianity," and nearly all NS Party members were either Evangelical Lutherans or Roman Catholics. Although Christianity had a favored status in the Third Reich, Germans were free to profess any religious outlook, or none. In many public statements Hitler affirmed a religious and spiritual outlook, and expressed admiration for Christian ethics and traditions.
But privately he grew steadily more critical of the Christian worldview.

The end sentence is wrong. It appears to be based on the corrupted ‘table talks’.
Hitler did not “privately grow steadily more critical of the Christian worldview”. It is more accurate to say he became critical of the Church. But he was never critical of Christ or his teachings.

[Hektor]

Yes he does.

No need to quote what someone else thinks about his words and argument.
Watch it again and think for yourself.

Please point exactly to where he denies he or the Nazi party is pagan in this speech. He doesn't. …It's literally just not there.

Here: Joe G says that the NSDAP are not pagan but Christian and you can hear that translation of him saying that at 1:06 in this clip of an excerpt from his speech....

The label pagan for National Socialism or the Axis in general does stem from liberal theologians in the US like Reinhold Niebuhr, Paul Tillich and others. They also shaped a new meaning for the term "Judeo-Christian" also to squish the far-spread reservations many Americans had against Jews at the time.

By portraying NS-Germany as pagan, they could do some othering of the Germans, which would make bombing them to smithereens easier later. It also avoided direct polemics against Germans, just like the term NAZI. And this for sure was an issue for the US given the large population they head of German descent. Tillich was a direct immigrant and a religious socialist that lost his professorship when Hitler had taken over. So, he for sure had an X to grind, there. With Niebuhr it's a bit more nuanced. His father left Germany after unification, and political motives played a role in this. Albeit I'm sure he didn't go as far as assigning the 'pagan' label. The issue was more about Prussian Authoritarianism and that also seems to be the motive behind Karl Barth's attitudes against German and especially the 'German Christians' as well as 'creation orders', which where a popular subject in German Theology at the time. Barth and Niebuhr were "Neo-Orthodox", which is a bit more nuanced liberal Protestantism and Tillich was an outright Socialist with existentialist views. It sort of it is the proto-Postmodernism in theology or a form of early deconstruction. While they didn't go as far as the more extreme liberal theology, which essentially denies the supernatural parts of the bible or the authenticity of the text as whole, they still just repackaged that idea with more orthodox sounding terminology. Essentially, it is theological liberalism, which is religiously packaged humanism, in disguise made more palatable for audiences that are theologically more conservative. And that was at the time applicable to the vast majority of active church members in both Germany and the US. The ordinary actively practicing Protestant was socially and culturally conservative and that was in line with his theological views that took the key teachings and the bible seriously. Already then, it was however contrasted with many of their preachers that came from universities after longer studies indulging in theological liberalism. The active church-attending Protestant loathed this, so if one wanted to have it persist, it had to be disguised a little and that made also the tactic plausible of portraying political opponents to leftism as pagan or anti-Christian. And they used anything they could find to portray it this way. Anything any NSDAP member said critical about the church or theologians was "Anti-Christian", any alignment with Germanic traditions or folkish thought was "pagan". In the end this was used against anything that wasn't in line with liberalism, marxism or cosmopolitanism, which later purged the universities in German as part of the Reeducation Program.