Just to be clear, i'm not arguing that Hitler didn't persecuted religions. Hitler in fact persecuted every ideology that he saw as a danger to the establishment of his own ideology. He wanted to eradicate political catholicism and anyother religious organization that had power.

A lot of the nazis wanted to start a pagan cult or what they called "positive christianity", where the bible and the cross would be replaced by Mein Kampf and the swastica, worshipping Hitler as the new messiah, and the aryan people as the chosen people, mixing Nazi ideology with christian ideology.

Hitler probably wanted to establish a state religion, much like we have in North Korea atm.In fact, Himmmler himslef was fascinated with germanic paganism, and didn't allow atheists into the SS because their "refusal to acknowledge higher powers" would be a "potential source of indiscipline" (wikipedia).

You have to understand that just because someone doesn't belong to an identified organized religion, it doesn't mean that this someone is an atheist. And by the way, atheism is not an ideology, so lets stop with the bullshit.

Edited 2/6/2016 17:32:17

In fact, what it seems like to me is that you're not interested in discussing the current topic anymore

The topic was not Nazi germany to begin with, i was always talking about the Bible. It became Nazi Germany when Norman tried to frame the Third Reich as an atheistic society, wich is complete bullshit, and that was the only thing i was arguing. But the topic was always the Bible.

By the way, you still haven't said what in your post i haven't adressed, so just stop playing games and say what you want to say already.

Atheism is a ideology, it's one that denies any and all higher beings. Cut your bullshit Frenchie.

Atheism is the disbelief in deities or divinities. Thats it. There isn't any belief system or doctrine tied to it

saying atheism is an ideology is like saying believing in a god is in itself an ideology, wich it is not.

A ideology is a system of ideals and ideas. Atheism has one main idea, and depending on the scientist worshipping prick in charge a few more.

Now you can have atheistic ideologies of course. Secular Humanism would be one of them for example, but atheism alone is just not.

edit: if you want to call the disbelief in a god an idea, i'm fine with it, but does an idea alone constitute an ideology?

Edited 2/6/2016 15:23:20

@Imperator

Also, i'd like to make something clear. I am not obligated to comment every sentence that every one makes on this thread. That would be stupid. I only comment the passages that i disagree with the most, i see no point in commenting on statement that i have no problem with, or that doesn't contradict my positions.

So unless you have a direct question to me, that i didn't answer, or that you made a specific point contradicting one of mine, you have no right to cry about me not adressing everything you said. This is not how a conversation/debate work. And if you feel that one of your point have not been adressed, or if you think that there is still unclear answers, all you have to do is directly pointing them to me so that i can adress them. It is not my job to go over everything you said and try to guess what point of mine is still unclear to you

edit: so i'm gonna repeat my direct question that you in fact didn't adress
What point in your post do you feel i haven't adressed, and wish me to do so?

Edited 2/6/2016 15:57:17

I was referring to the post I made on 2/5/2016 13:54:44 on page 10 of this thread.

It's moot now since you posted earlier today clarifying that
you basically agreed with everything in said post, but yesterday you were trying to ignore the contents of that post with the exception of a tiny part where I mentioned that Christianity originated in judaism and thus it's logically impossible that the nazis followed christianity.

You quoted this small point at the end of my post which really had very little do with the contents of the rest of my post, and used it to go of on a 10-paragraph rant about how europeans are so racist and that they can use the wicked, wicked new testament to justify this racism.

Like I said, earlier today, you posted this:

Just to be clear, i'm not arguing that Hitler didn't persecuted religions. Hitler in fact persecuted every ideology that he saw as a danger to the establishment of his own ideology. He wanted to eradicate political catholicism and anyother religious organization that had power.

A lot of the nazis wanted to start a pagan cult or what they called "positive christianity", where the bible and the cross would be replaced by Mein Kampf and the swastica, worshipping Hitler as the new messiah, and the aryan people as the chosen people, mixing Nazi ideology with christian ideology.

Hitler probably wanted to establish a state religion, much like we have in North Korea atm.In fact, Himmmler himslef was fascinated with germanic paganism, and didn't allow atheists into the SS because their "refusal to acknowledge higher powers" would be a "potential source of indiscipline".

You have to understand that just because someone doesn't belong to an identified organized religion, it doesn't mean that this someone is an atheist. And by the way, atheism is not an ideology, so lets stop with the bullshit.

Which is much more relevant to what we've been discussing than your "Europeans are so racist" rant.

Atheism IS an ideology. From wikipedia:

Ideology, in the Althusserian sense, is "the imaginary relation to the real conditions of existence". It can be described as a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's beliefs, goals, expectations, and motivations.

That is, an ideology which in it's most basic form, describes the belief that there is no God. This is distinct from several similar positions such as the lack of a belief in a god, or not knowing.


Several countries, especially socialist ones like the USSR in times past, or present-day china and north korea, promote state atheism. In many of these cases, religion was meant to be replaced by loyalty to the state and reverence of their leaders. This doesn't mean that they are not atheist societies, it just means that they've used the state as a tool to build that atheist society.

Fundamentally, positive christianity is an atheistic ideology, like state atheism, rather than a religion like other forms of chrisitanity. The only reason it had to be called positive christianty instead of atheism is that at the time, protestants and catholics made up around 99% of germanys population, and it would have been a functionally suicidal move for the nazis to outright ban chrisitanity. There would have been revolution, not the 80% approval rating hitler enjoyed.

yesterday you were trying to ignore the contents of that post with the exception of a tiny part where I mentioned that Christianity originated in judaism and thus it's logically impossible that the nazis followed christianity.

I wasn't trying to "ignore" it. I didn't comment on it because i had no reason to. It is a historical fact, and i have no problem with facts. None of it contradicted anything i had previously said. So really saying that i was "ignoring" it or "avoiding it" is very disingenuous.

Actually the Nazi, with the positive christianity, tried to make christians deny the semitic origin of the bible and of christ.

You quoted this small point at the end of my post which really had very little do with the contents of the rest of my post, and used it to go of on a 10-paragraph rant about how europeans are so racist and that they can use the wicked, wicked new testament to justify this racism.

Not what i said. My initial point was that the Church used the Bible to spread anti semitic ideology, wich helped Hitler succeed in his enterprise (edit: and there is actually an argument to be made about Hitler's catholic background and education, and his antisemitic ideology) . This was always my point throughout the conversation. And it is still my point. I only responded to Norman false satement branding the Third Reigh an atheist society, but other than that, the bible ideology was alway the topic, not Nazi Germany.

edit:[

your "Europeans are so racist" rant

Complete strawman, i never said that]

religion was meant to be replaced by loyalty to the state and reverence of their leaders

yes, stalinism, like Nazism, wanted to replace the established religions by a "religion of the state", where the leader of the state is to be worshipped. In the case of USSR, this stalinism ideology was evidently and openly atheistic, but "atheistic" was a characteristic of the ideology, not the ideology itself. In the case of Nazism, that's just not true, they wanted to use religious beliefs to form a new religion that would put the state and Hitler in the center of it, but the belief in god was never prohibited, on the contrary since Hitler wanted to frame himself as a new messiah doing God's work.(and Hitler actually never renounced his catholicism)

Atheism IS an ideology.
[wikipedia: an ideology is] a set of conscious and unconscious ideas which make up one's beliefs, goals, expectations, and motivations.

Can you clarify what are the "set of ideas", the "goals", "expectations", and "motivations" that are tied to the sentence "i don't believe in a god" please?

And if i tell you "i believe in a god", can you tell me what is the goals, motivations, and set of ideas that i abide by?

wikipedia: "Although some atheists have adopted secular philosophies (eg. humanism and skepticism),there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere."

edit: tipo

Edited 2/6/2016 18:47:43

if i'm going play the devil's advocate to my own argument, i guess you could say that "militant atheism', or "new atheism", or "anti-theism", whatever you wanna call it, can be viewed as an ideology (barely)

The tenants of the ideology would be that faith-based beliefs/ideologies/philosophies/religions are dangerous to societies. And the goal would be to convince people to abandon a faith-based mentality and adopt a more evidence-based and reason-based worldview.

edit: tipo

Edited 2/6/2016 19:03:12

I can't consider these guys militants. They're radicals, but not militants. When they start burning down churches, they'll earn that title.

hum... maybe in english the word "militant" has a different meaning. But in french it just means being active and vocal in support for a cause. It doesn't necessarily have a pejorative meaning tied to violence.

Maybe "activist atheism" then?

"evangelical atheism"? lol

Edited 2/6/2016 20:12:58