← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Petr
Thread ID: 16673 | Posts: 53 | Started: 2005-02-09
2005-02-09 05:52 | User Profile
[url]http://www.roadtopeace.org/Terrorism/Hitler/mkv1c12.htm[/url]
[SIZE=3]MEIN KAMPF, Chapter 12:[/SIZE]
...
[B]If anything is unfolkish, it is this tossing around of old Germanic expressions which neither fit into the present period nor represent anything definite, but can easily lead to seeing the significance of a movement in its outward vocabulary[/B]. This is a real menace which today can be observed on countless occasions.
Altogether then, and also in the period that followed, I had to warn again and again against those deutschvolkisch wandering scholars whose positive accomplishment is always practically nil, but whose conceit can scarcely be excelled. The young movement had and still has to guard itself against an influx of people whose sole recommendation for the most part lies in their declaration that they have fought for thirty and even forty years for the same idea. Anyone who fights for forty years for a so-called idea without being able to bring about even the slightest success, in fact, without having prevented the victory of the opposite, has, with forty years of activity, provided proof of his own incapacity. The danger above all lies in the fact that such natures do not want to fit into the movement as links, but keep shooting off their mouths about leading circles in which alone, on the strength of their age-old activity, they can see a suitable place for further activity. But woe betide if a young movement is surrendered to the mercies of such people. No more than a business man who in forty years of activity has steadily run a big business into the ground is fitted to be the founder of a new one, is a folkish Methuselah, who in exactly the same time has gummed up and petrified a great idea, fit for the leadership of a new, young movement!
Besides, only a fragment of all these people come into the new movement to serve it, but in most cases, under its protection or through the possibilities it offers, to warm over their old cabbage
They do not want to benefit the idea of the new doctrine, they only expect it to give them a chance to make humanity miserable with their own ideas. For what kind of ideas they often are, it is hard to tell.
[B]The characteristic thing about these people is that they rave about old Germanic heroism, about dim prehistory, stone axes spear and shield, but in reality are the greatest cowards that can be imagined. For the same people who brandish scholarly imitations of old German tin swords, and wear a dressed bearskin with bull's horns over their bearded heads, preach for the present nothing but struggle with spiritual weapons, and run away as fast as they can from every Communist blackjack. [/B] Posterity will have little occasion to glorify their own heroic existence in a new epic.
I came to know these people too well not to feel the profoundest disgust at their miserable play-acting. [B]But they make a ridiculous impression on the broad masses, and the Jew has every reason to spare these folkish comedians, even to prefer them to the true fighters for a coming German state. [/B] With all this, these people are boundlessly conceited; despite all the proofs of their complete incompetence, they claim to know everything better and become a real plague for all straightforward and honest fighters to whom heroism seems worth honoring, not only in the past, but who also endeavor to give posterity a similar picture by their own actions.
And often it can be distinguished only with difficulty which of these people act out of inner stupidity or incompetence and which only pretend to for certain reasons. [B]Especially with the so-called religious reformers on an old Germanic basis, I always have the feeling that they were sent by those powers which do not want the resurrection of our people. [/B] For their whole activity leads the people away from the common struggle against the common enemy, the Jew, and instead lets them waste their strength on inner religious squabbles as senseless as they are disastrous. For these very reasons the establishment of a strong central power implying the unconditional authority of a Kadership is necessary in the movement. By it alone can such ruinous elements be squelched. [B]And for this reason the greatest enemies of a uniform, strictly led and conducted movement are to be found in the circles of these folkish wandering Jews. In the movement they hate the power that checks their mischief.[/B]
Not for nothing did the young movement establish a definite program in which it did not use the word 'folkish.' The concept folkish, in view of its conceptual boundlessness, is no possible basis for a movement and offers no standard for membership in one. The more indefinable this concept is in practice, the more and broader interpretations it permits, the greater becomes the possibility of invoking its authority. The insertion of such an indefinable and variously interpretable concept into the political struggle leads to the destruction of any strict fighting solidarity, since the latter does not permit leaving to the individual the definition of his faith and will.
And it is disgraceful to see all the people who run around today with the word 'folkish' on their caps and how many have their own interpretation of this concept. A Bavarian professor by the name of Bayer,l a famous fighter with spiritual weapons, rich in equally spiritual marches on Berlin, thinks that the concept folkish consists only in a monarchistic attitude. This learned mind, however, has thus far forgotten to give a closer explanation of the identity of our German monarchs of the past with the folkish opinion of today. And I fear that in this the gentleman would not easily succeed. For anything less folkish than most of the Germanic monarchic state formations can hardly be imagined. If this were not so, they would never have disappeared, or their disappearance would offer proof of the unsoundness of the folkish outlook.
And so everyone shoots off his mouth about this concept as he happens to understand it. As a basis for a movement of political struggle, such a multiplicity of opinions is out of the question.
[B]I shall not even speak of the un-worldliness of these folkish Saint Johns of the twentieth century or their ignorance of the popular soul. It is sufficiently illustrated by the ridicule with which they are treated by the Left, which lets them talk and laughs at them.[/B]
Anyone in this world who does not succeed in being hated by his adversaries does not seem to me to be worth much as a friend. And thus the friendship of these people for our young movement was not only worthless, but solely and always harmful, and it was also the main reason why, first of all, we chose the name of 'party'--we had grounds for hoping that by this alone a whole swarm of these folkish sleepwalkers would be frightened away from us-and why in the second place we termed ourselves National Socialist German Workers' Party.
The first expression kept away the antiquity enthusiasts, the big-mouths and superficial proverb-makers of the so-called folkish idea,' and the second freed us from the entire host of knights of the 'spiritual sword,' all the poor wretches who wield the 'spiritual weapon' as a protecting shield to hide their actual cowardice.
It goes without saying that in the following period we were attacked hardest especially by these last, not actively, of course, but only with the pen, just as you would expect from such folkish goose-quills. For them our principle, 'Against those who attack us with force we will defend ourselves with force,' had something terrifying about it. They persistently reproached us, not only with brutal worship of the blackjack, but with lack of spirit as such. The fact that in a public meeting a Demosthenes can be brought to silence if only fifty idiots, supported by their voices and their fists, refuse to let him speak, makes no impression whatever on such a quack. His inborn cowardice never lets him get into such danger. For he does not work 'noisily' and 'obtrusively,' but in 'silence.'
Even today r cannot warn our young movement enough against falling into the net of these so-called 'silent workers.' They are not only cowards, but they are also always incompetents and do-nothings. A man who knows a thing, who is aware of a given danger, and sees the possibility of a remedy with his own eyes, has the duty and obligation, by God, not to work 'silently,' but to stand up before the whole public against the evil and for its cure. If he does not do so, he is a disloyal, miserable weakling who fails either from cowardice or from laziness and inability. To be sure, this does not apply at all to most of these people, for they know absolutely nothing, but behave as though they knew God knows what; they can do nothing but try to swindle the whole world with their tricks; they are lazy, but with the 'silent' work they claim to do, they arouse the impression of an enormous and conscientious activity; in short, they are swindlers, political crooks who hate the honest work of others. As soon as one of these folkish moths praises the darkness 1 of silence, we can bet a thousand to one that by it he produces nothing, but steals, steals from the fruits of other people's work.
...
Petr
2005-02-09 20:16 | User Profile
**Adolf Hitler privately to Heinrich Himmler, October 14, 1941: ** Adolf Hitler, in Bormann-Vermerke (transcribed by Martin Bormann), reprinted as Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944 (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Trans.), New York: Farrar, Straus & Young, 1953, pages #48-51.
[url="http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/4885/hitler.html"]http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/4885/hitler.html[/url]
[QUOTE] "It may be asked whether concluding a concordat with the churches wouldn't facilitate our exercise of power......." [/QUOTE][QUOTE]"Secondly there is also a question of principle. Trying to take a long- range view of things, is it conceivable that one could found anything durable based on falsehood? When I think of our people's future, I must look beyond immediate advantages, even if these advantages were to last 300-500 years or more. I'm convinced that any pact with the church can offer only a provisional benefit, for sooner or later the scientific spirit will disclose the harmful character of such a compromise. Thus the state will have based its existence on a foundation that one day will collapse.
"An educated man retains the sense of the mysteries of nature, and bows before the unknowable. An uneducated man, on the other hand, runs the risk of going over to atheism (which is a return to the state of the animal) as soon as he perceives that the state, in sheer opportunism, is making use of false ideas in the matter of religion, whilst in other fields it bases everything on pure science.
"Being weighed down by a superstitious past, men are afraid of things that can't, or can't yet be explained - that is to say, of the unknown. If anyone has needs of a metaphysical nature, I can't satisfy them with the party's program. Time will pass until the moment when science can answer all the questions.
"So it's not opportune to hurl ourselves now into a struggle with the churches. The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death. A slow death has something comforting about it. [color=Red]The dogma of Christianity gets worn away before the advance of science[/color]. Religion will have to make more and more concessions. Gradually the myths crumble. All that's left is to prove that in nature there's no frontier between the organic and the inorganic. When understanding of the universe has become widespread, when the majority of men know that the stars are not sources of light but worlds - perhaps inhabited worlds like ours - then the Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.
"But one must continue to pay attention to another aspect of the problem. It's possible to satisfy the needs of the inner life by an intimate communion with nature., or by knowledge of the past. **[color=Red]Only a minority, however, at the present stage of the mind's development, can feel the respect inspired by the unknown and thus satisfy the metaphysical needs of the soul.[/color] ** The average human being has the same needs, but can satisfy them only by elementary means. That's particularly true of women, as also of peasants who impotently watch the destruction of their crops. The person whose life tends to simplification is thirsty for belief, and he dimly clings to it with all his strength.
"Nobody has the right to deprive simple people of their childish certainties until they've acquired others that are more reasonable. Indeed it's most important that the higher belief should be well established in them before the lower belief has been removed. We must finally achieve this. But it would serve no purpose to replace an old belief by a new one that would merely fill the place left vacant by its predecessor.
"It seems to me that [color=Red]nothing would be more foolish than to reestablish the worship of Odin[/color]. Our old mythology had ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund. At that point the ancient world was divided between the systems of philosophy and the worship of idols. It's not desirable that the whole of humanity should be stultified - and the only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.
"**If in the course of 1-2,000 years science arrives at the necessity of renewing its points of view, that will not mean that science is a liar. Science cannot lie, for it's always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true. When it makes a mistake, it does so in good faith. [color=Red]It's Christianity which is the liar; it's in perpetual conflict with itself[/color]. **
"One may ask whether the disappearance of Christianity would entail the disappearance of a belief in God. [color=Red]That's not to be desired[/color]. The notion of divinity gives most men the opportunity to concretize the feeling they have of supernatural realities. Why should we destroy this wonderful power they have of incarnating the feeling for the divine that is within them?"[/QUOTE] - Adolf Hitler, in Bormann-Vermerke (transcribed by Martin Bormann), reprinted as Hitler's Secret Conversations 1941-1944 (H.R. Trevor-Roper, Trans.), New York: Farrar, Straus & Young, 1953, pages #48-51
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="alt2" style="border: 1px inset ;">
2005-02-09 20:25 | User Profile
[B][I] - "Science cannot lie, for it's always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true. "[/I][/B]
Looks like Adolf was the same kind of naive science-worshipper (scientism) as our own Angler. I guess this is why Nazi Germany declared ban on "Jewish physics" that later gave Americans a nuclear bomb.
Petr
2005-02-09 20:36 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr]I guess......... [/QUOTE] **[color=Red] "It's Christianity which is the liar; it's in perpetual conflict with itself."[/color] **
2005-02-09 20:50 | User Profile
Blah blah blah. Adolf might have known something about 20th century neopagan poseurs, but he didn't know anything significant about Christianity.
Petr
2005-02-09 20:58 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr]Blah blah blah......[/QUOTE] Wow. Such a devastating rebuttal; and just when I thought I had you.
You'll probably enjoy this quote as well.
**Martin Bormann on Christianity**
(Martin Bormann, Reich Leader, 1942, 'National Socialist and Christian Concepts are Incompatible', From Kirchliches Jahrbuch fur die evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, 1933-1944, pp. 470-472, quoted pp. 245-247, George L. Mosse, Nazi Culture: A Documentary History). [QUOTE] "National Socialist and Christian concepts are incompatible. The Christian Churches build upon the ignorance of men and strive to keep large portions of the people in ignorance because only in this way can the Christian Churches maintain their power. On the other hand, National Socialism is based on scientific foundations. Christianity's immutable principles, which were laid down almost two thousand years ago, have increasingly stiffened into [color=Red]life-alien dogmas[/color]. National Socialism, however, if it wants to fulfill its task further, must always guide itself according to the newest data of scientific researches.
"**The Christian Churches have long been aware that exact scientific knowledge poses a threat to their existence**. Therefore, by means of such pseudo-sciences as theology, they take great pains to suppress or falsify scientific research...No one would know anything about Christianity if pastors had not crammed it down his throat in his childhood. **The so-called loving God by no means reveals the knowledge of His existence to young people, but amazingly enough, and [color=Red]despite His omnipotence, He leaves this to the efforts of a pastor[/color]**. When in the future our youth no longer hear anything about this Christianity, whose doctrine is far below our own, Christianity will automatically disappear."
"[...] When we National Socialists **speak of a belief in God...[we mean] [color=Red][t]he force which moves all these bodies in the universe, in accordance with natural law[/color], is what we call the Almighty or God.** The assertion that this world-force can worry about the fate of every individual, every bacillus on earth, and that it can be influenced by so-called prayer or other astonishing things, **is based either on a suitable dose of naivete or on outright commercial effrontery**."[/QUOTE] (Martin Bormann, Reich Leader, 1942, 'National Socialist and Christian Concepts are Incompatible', From Kirchliches Jahrbuch fur die evangelische Kirche in Deutschland, 1933-1944, pp. 470-472, quoted pp. 245-247, George L. Mosse, Nazi Culture: A Documentary History).
2005-02-09 21:11 | User Profile
I have seen these rantings before - and Hitler's and Bormann's (very unoriginal) opinions are meaningless.
In fact, Christian theology was necessary ingredient for the rise of Western science:
[B]from Rodney Stark’s “For the Glory of God” (2003, Princeton University Press), pages 147-148:[/B]
[COLOR=Indigo][SIZE=3]THE CHRISTIAN DIFFERENCE [/SIZE]
My answer to this question is as brief as it is unoriginal: Christianity depicted God as rational, responsive, dependable, and omnipotent being and the universe as his personal creation, thus having a rational, lawful, stable structure, awaiting human comprehension.
As Nicole Oresme put it, God’s creation “is much like that of man making a clock and letting it run and continue it sown motion by itself.”(78) Or, in the words of Psalm 119:89-90: “For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven. Thy faithfulness is unto all generations: thou hast established the earth, and it abideth.” Among the scriptural passages most frequently quoted by medieval scholars is the line from the Wisdom of Solomon (11:20) “(T)hou hast ordered all things in measure and number and weight.”
In contrast with the dominant religious and philosophical doctrines in the non-Christian world, Christians developed science because they believed that it could be done, and should be done. [B]As Alfred North Whitehead (1861-1947) put it during one of his Lowell Lectures at Harvard in 1925, science arose in Europe because of the widespread “faith in the possibility of science … derivative from medieval theology.”(79) [/B] Whitehead’s pronouncement shocked not only his distinguished audience but Western intellectuals in general once his lectures had been published: How could this great philosopher and mathematician, coauthor with Bertrand Russell of the landmark Principia Mathematica (1910-1913) make such an outlandish claim? Did he not know that religion is the mortal enemy of scientific enquiry?
Whitehead knew better. He had grasped that Christian theology was essential for the rise of science in the West, just as surely as non-Christian theologies had stifled the scientific quest everywhere else. As he explained:
[I]"I don’t think, however, that I have even yet brought out the greatest contribution of medievalism in to the formation of the scientific movement. I mean the inexpugnable belief that that every detailed occurrence can be correlated with its antecedents in a perfectly definite manner, exemplifying general principles. Without this belief the incredible labours of scientists would be without hope. It is this instinctive conviction, vividly poised before the imagination, which is the motive power for research: - that there is a secret, a secret which can be unveiled. How has this conviction been so vividly implanted in the European mind?
"When we compare this tone of thought in Europe with the attitude of other civilizations when left for themselves, there seems but one source of its origin. It must come from the medieval insistence on the rationality of God, conceived as with the personal energy of Jehovah and with the rationality of a Greek philosopher. Every detail was supervised and ordered: the search into nature could only result in the vindication of the faith in the rationality. Remember that I am not talking about of the explicit faith of a few individuals. What I mean is the impress on the European mind arising from the unquestioned faith of centuries. By this I mean the instinctive tone of thought and not a mere creed of words.(80)[/I]
Whitehead ended with the remark that the images of Gods found in other religions, especially in Asia, are too impersonal or too irrational to have sustained science. Any particular “occurrence might be due to the fiat of an irrational despot” God, or might be produced by “some impersonal, inscrutable origin of things. There is not the dame confidence as in the intelligible rationality of a personal being.”(81)
[B]Indeed, most non-Christian religions do not posit a creation at all: the universe is eternal and, while it may pursue cycles, it is without beginning or purpose, and, most important of all, having never been created, it has no Creator. Consequently, the universe is thought to be a supreme mystery, inconsistent, unpredictable, and arbitrary. For those holding these religious premises, the path to wisdom is through meditation and mystical insights, and there is no occasion to celebrate reason[/B].
Hitler and Bormann were ungrateful upstarts who pretended to represent and fight for Western civilization, all the while despising it main spiritual pillar (Christianity), introducing Oriental concepts like the adoration of an infallible, god-like leader, allying with Japanese and Muslims and trying to destroy and enslave such Slavic nations as Serbs and Russians that had so long acted as a bulwark of Europe against Asian attackers.
Petr
2005-02-09 21:18 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr] Hitler's and Bormann's (very unoriginal) opinions are meaningless.[/QUOTE] Funny. You quote Adolph Hitler as an authority in your first post where you are bashing ancient germanic religion.
Then, when your source [Adolph Hitler] is used against Christianity, you get your panties in a wad.
2005-02-09 21:25 | User Profile
Like I said, Hitler had [B]first-hand knowledge[/B] about Wotanist jokers and their modest achievements in the movement - his ideas on more abstract and alien issues like Christian dogmas and science are just his [B]personal opinions[/B], nothing more.
It's as simple as that - no hypocrisy involved.
And here's some deep wisdom from Martin Bormann:
[COLOR=Indigo]"As Bormann hoped, that evening Hitler chose the second policy and the next day he told Bormann to issue population control measures for the occupied territories. [B]Bormann developed an eight-paragraph secret order that one historian termed "perhaps the most extreme policy statement ever issued from the Fuhrerhauptquartier[/B]."[4] It included the following:[/COLOR]
[COLOR=DarkRed][B][I]"When girls and women in the Occupied Territories of the East have abortions, we can only be in favor of it; in any case we should not oppose it. The Fuhrer believes that we should authorize the development of a thriving trade in contraceptives. We are not interested in seeing the non-German population multiply.[5][/I][/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://ktk.ru/~cm/nazisex.htm[/url]
[COLOR=Blue]"The Slavs are to work for us. Insofar as we do not need them, they may die. Therefore, compulsory vaccination and German health service are superfluous. The fertility of the Slavs is undesirable. They may use contraceptives or practice abortion, the more the better. [B]Education is dangerous. It is enough if they can count up to one hundred. At best an education which produces useful coolies for us is admissible. Every educated person is a future enemy[/B]."[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/GERbormann.htm[/url]
"Every educated person is a future enemy"... where has his trust in the scientific advancement disappeared? Does knowledge pose a threat to the existence of Nazism?
Petr
2005-02-09 21:39 | User Profile
Why should I defend these alleged statements of Bormann?
We were discussing your use of Adolf Hitler to support a rejection of religion, remember?
2005-02-09 21:45 | User Profile
[B][I] - "We were discussing your use of Adolf Hitler to support a rejection of religion, remember?"[/I][/B]
And I answered that as well, see?
[I]"Like I said, Hitler had [B]first-hand knowledge[/B] about Wotanist jokers and their modest achievements in the movement - his ideas on more alien and abstract issues like Christian dogmas and science are just his [B]personal opinions[/B], nothing more."[/I]'
I may ask my grandpa: "hey, what kind of people were those soldiers you fought with in the great war" and give lot a of weight to his opinion, but I wouldn't give [B]that [/B] much value on his opinions in historical-metaphysical issues like Christianity's overall influence on the Western society.
And I think it was only fair for me to show how hypocritical attitude Bormann (whom you quoted) had towards scientific education.
Petr
2005-02-09 22:19 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][B][I] - "Science cannot lie, for it's always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true. "[/I][/B]
Looks like Adolf was the same kind of naive science-worshipper (scientism) as our own Angler. I guess this is why Nazi Germany declared ban on "Jewish physics" that later gave Americans a nuclear bomb.
Petr[/QUOTE]And actually of course the accuracy of what Bormann wrote is certainly questionable anyway, as I've discussed with you before.
[QUOTE]It should be noted that Martin Bormann has been recently exposed as a Soviet agent. Its no wonder he would be writing an anti-Christian book. The question is whether Bormann's telling the truth about Hitler or promoting his own agenda.
Regards, Wild Bill
[URL=http://www.originaldissent.com/forums/report.php?p=92944]Was Hitler's Secretary Martin Bormann a Soviet Spy?[/URL] [/QUOTE]
2005-02-09 22:33 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][B][I] - "Science cannot lie, for it's always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true. "[/I][/B]
Looks like Adolf was the same kind of naive science-worshipper (scientism) as our own Angler. I guess this is why Nazi Germany declared ban on "Jewish physics" that later gave Americans a nuclear bomb.
Petr[/QUOTE]
Interesting quotes from Hitler, even though their source now seems very dubious. Quite likely I suspect Bormann at the very least selectively edited selectively this material to drive it to his own inclinations, which were openly much more anti-clerical and anti-religious than Hitler himself (regardless of whether you accept the spy-speculation about Bormann.).
But it shows the weakness of Hitler, and pretty much a lot of other National Socialists too, (particularly NAer types modeled after him) on this. Rejecting Christianity personally, they are reluctant to make a major break, finding its alternatives unacceptable also (paganism or atheism). Therefore they sort of muddle around without a clear policy.
I think the only really effective consencus religion the NSers ever came up with was the [I]fuehrer-prinzip[/I] - godlike worship of the fuehrer himself. And that naturally tends to expire on the death of your fuehrer. NAers are finding this out all over again with the passing of Pierce, wher it seems quite likely the whole NA will just disappear.
2005-02-09 22:51 | User Profile
[COLOR=DarkSlateGray][B] - "I think the only really effective consencus religion the NSers ever came up with was the [I]fuehrer-prinzip [/I] - godlike worship of the fuehrer himself. And that naturally tends to expire on the death of your fuehrer. NAers are finding this out all over again with the passing of Pierce, wher it seems quite likely the whole NA will just disappear."[/B][/COLOR]
G.L. Rockwell's organization didn't survive his death either...
Good point, Okie. There's an interesting historical parallel here - about the only pagan religion that was still taken somewhat seriously in the decaying Roman Empire was the emperor-worship, which had been consciously imitated from the competing Persian empire as a way of keeping the empire together.
Michael A. Hoffman also neatly points out this fundamental flaw in the Nazi system:
[B][COLOR=Blue]"I do not call Horst Mahler "Nazi." I never use that term for anyone who was not a contemporary of Hitler. Nazism today is politically dead, because Hitler is dead and Nazism was a movement based on the messiahship of one man."[/COLOR][/B]
And then he represents an interesting thesis:
[COLOR=Blue]"There is, however, an ideal of racial ecology with both pre-Christian and medieval European antecedents, which was personified in the 20th century by philosophers such as Gregor Strasser and others. [B]Many of these thinkers were murdered by Hitler so as to make room for the NSDAP fuhrerprinzip. [/B] The older philosophy of racial ecology, which carries with it no intrinsic logic of persecution, still lives, while the Hitler movement is dead, except in so far as the secret police of the U.S. and Germany animate it from time to time."[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.revisionisthistory.org/revisionist13.html[/url]
Petr
2005-02-10 02:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr][COLOR=DarkSlateGray][B] - "I think the only really effective consencus religion the NSers ever came up with was the [I]fuehrer-prinzip [/I] - godlike worship of the fuehrer himself. And that naturally tends to expire on the death of your fuehrer. NAers are finding this out all over again with the passing of Pierce, wher it seems quite likely the whole NA will just disappear."[/B][/COLOR]
G.L. Rockwell's organization didn't survive his death either...
Good point, Okie. There's an interesting historical parallel here - about the only pagan religion that was still taken somewhat seriously in the decaying Roman Empire was the emperor-worship, which had been consciously imitated from the competing Persian empire as a way of keeping the empire together. Of course Spengler and some others in volkish circles talked directly of a need for Caesarism, so this wasn't by accident, Both seemed also to be worship of which was rather bogus to anyone in the know. One thing that Nazism and Caesarism also share in common of course was the propensity for knocking off Caesar's - strikes me as a rather odd way to treat supposed "gods".
And then he represents an interesting thesis:
[COLOR=Blue]"There is, however, an ideal of racial ecology with both pre-Christian and medieval European antecedents, which was personified in the 20th century by philosophers such as Gregor Strasser and others. [B]Many of these thinkers were murdered by Hitler so as to make room for the NSDAP fuhrerprinzip. [/B] The older philosophy of racial ecology, which carries with it no intrinsic logic of persecution, still lives, while the Hitler movement is dead, except in so far as the secret police of the U.S. and Germany animate it from time to time."[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.revisionisthistory.org/revisionist13.html[/url]
Petr[/QUOTE] Interesting writer. I'd heard vaguely of him before. His writings on the Third Reich era or in general don't appear to me to be especially lucid or insightful really basefd on that link you gave me.
I'm not sure who he had in mind specifically. Perhaps it was the revolutionary conservatives, of which a few did join the resistance or otherwise go underground. But by and large this fate wasn't common. This was a subject I discussed at length with "Triskelion" of Polinco (apparently very close to or the same as "Jennifer"), that of the revolutionary conservatives. She like many Nazi's or almost Nazi's wanted to downplay the persecution of revolutionary conservatives completely, painting them as happy members of the regime. Hoffman perhaps wants to do the opposite. But generally I've found those organizationally close to Ne-Nazi organizations in general like both Hoffman and "Triskelion" tend to be quite unreliable, having rather strongly opportunistic and fairly transparent motives for their interpretations of history.
In Hoffman's case, I wonder if he is confusing Gregor Strasser with Otto Strasser, who was the genuine philosopher type, whereas Gregor really was not that theoretical. Such elementary mistakes are rather common at this level, and also rather easy to identify with opportunistic reinventions of history. Gregor is still viewed as just a tragic figure aong Nazi's, but talking about Otto Strasser or Strasserism in general to a Nazi is sort of like talking about Trotsky, Trotskyism, or Trotskyites to a regular Communist, (i.e., the same way we talk about Benedict Arnold, or Norwegians talk about Quisling).
2005-02-10 13:24 | User Profile
Since all of you seem so knowledgeable about Adolf Hitler, maybe you could help me understand the following declarations by the Catholic Fuhrer.
"My feeling as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in lonliness, surrounded by only a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned me to fight against them...In boundless love, as a Christian and as a man, I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord rose at last in His might and seized the scourge, to drive out of the temple the brood of vipers and adders..."
And this:
"I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so."
Also, I often wonder about this...If he was so anti-Christian, why was he never excommunicated by the Catholic Church?
2005-02-10 14:45 | User Profile
vytis, you might consider the possibility that Hitler was a lying opportunist who merely pandered for his Catholic audiences.
Were these quotations before or after his ascension to power?
And as for excommunication, Heinrich Himmler was not excommunicated either, and there is not doubt whatsoever about [B]his[/B] anti-Christianity.
Petr
2005-02-10 15:09 | User Profile
Jehuda Bauer, Professor of Holocaust Studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, describes the real "god" of Hitler and the Nazis in his article, "The Trauma of the Holocaust: Some Historical Perspectives," by saying: ""They wanted to go back to a pagan world, beautiful, naturalistic, where natural hierarchies based on the supremacy of the strong would be established, because strong equaled good, powerful equaled civilized. The world did have a kind of God, the merciless God of nature, the brutal God of races, the oppressive God of hierarchies." In other words, definitely non-Christian.
Historian Paul Johnson wrote that Hitler hated Christianity with a passion, adding that shortly after assuming power in 1933, Hitler told Hermann Rauschnig that he intended "to stamp out Christianity root and branch."
As Hitler grew in power, he made other anti-Christian statements. For example, he was quoted in Hitler: A Study in Tyranny, by Allan Bullock, as saying: "I'll make these damned parsons feel the power of the state in a way they would have never believed possible. For the moment, I am just keeping my eye upon them: if I ever have the slightest suspicion that they are getting dangerous, I will shoot the lot of them. This filthy reptile raises its head whenever there is a sign of weakness in the State, and therefore it must be stamped on. We have no sort of use for a fairy story invented by the Jews."
But in contrast to these quotes, some of Hitler's speeches definitely seem to put him in the Christian camp as a fighter against atheism. For example, he said, on signing the Nazi-Vatican Concordat, April 26, 1933: "Secular schools can never be tolerated because such schools have no religious instruction, and a general moral instruction without religious foundation is built on air; consequently all character training and religion must be derived from faith . . ."
An Associated Press article from the Lansing State Journal, February 23, 1933, is headlined, "Hitler Aims Blow at 'Godless' Move," and talks about how Hitler was campaigning against atheist communists and wanted support from Catholic Nazis. One line in the article specifically says, "Hitler, himself, is a Catholic." (You can see the entire article at [URL=http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/unknown/hitler.html]www.infidels.org/library/historical/unknown/hitler.html[/URL].) In addition, in 1941, Hitler told General Gerhart Engel: "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so." He never left the church. He was baptized a Roman Catholic as an infant and was a communicant and altar boy in his youth.
2005-02-10 15:17 | User Profile
[B][I] - "Historian Paul Johnson wrote that Hitler hated Christianity with a passion, adding that shortly after assuming power in 1933, Hitler told Hermann Rauschnig that he intended "to stamp out Christianity root and branch."[/I][/B]
albion, every scholar worth his salt knows nowadays that Rauschning is a highly unreliable source.
This book is the best modern source to illustrate the downright schizophrenic Nazi approach to Christian religion:
[url]http://www.amazon.ca/exec/obidos/ASIN/0521823714/702-7843472-5797614[/url]
[SIZE=3][B]The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945[/B][/SIZE]
[B]by Richard Steigmann-Gall[/B]
...
[B]From Publishers Weekly[/B]
[COLOR=Indigo]" A number of studies have examined the relationship between Nazism and the German Christian churches (most notably Klaus Scholder's well-known The Churches and the Third Reich). There are, of course, also studies of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Karl Barth and others that explore the relationship between the Reich and the church in terms of the Christian protest against Nazism. Steigmann-Gall, a history professor at Kent State, adds a new chapter to the story by investigating the way that Christianity functioned within the Nazi party itself. Using party pamphlets and writings of key members, he demonstrates that as early as 1920 the group declared that it represented the standpoint of a positive Christianity, which provided the tenets of its anti-Semitic and antimaterialist stance. Many of the Nazi elite believed that their own party doctrine and Christianity shared common themes such as the opposition of good against evil, God against the devil and the struggle for national salvation from the Jews and Marxism. This positive Christianity enfolded both Catholicism and Protestantism, for the Nazis believed that confessional disunity presented the greatest challenge to national unity. Steigmann-Gall examines the leaders of the party and shows how many of them contributed to the view of an intimate relationship between Nazism and Christianity. He also explores how the Nazis identified the Jews with the Devil and believed that God would liberate them from this evil. Although this revised dissertation plods along in workmanlike fashion, Steigmann-[/COLOR][COLOR=Indigo]Gall uncovers new information and helpful insights about the period. [/COLOR] "
Here is an interesting, lengthy interview of Steigmann-Gall:
[SIZE=3][B]"Nazism had Strong Ideological Roots in Christianity"[/B][/SIZE]
[url]http://www.pubtheo.com/page.asp?PID=1268[/url]
Petr
2005-02-10 15:26 | User Profile
[size=4]The Great Scandal: Christianity's Role in the Rise of the Nazis[/size] [size=3]by Gregory S. Paul[/size]
[url="http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/images/nazi-priests.jpg"][img]http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/images/nazi-priests_small.jpg[/img][/url]ââ¬ÅYou know what happens when atheists take overââ¬âremember Nazi Germany?ââ¬Â Many Christians point to Nazism, alongside Stalinism, to illustrate the perils of atheism in power.1 At the other extreme, some authors paint the Vatican as Hitlerââ¬â¢s eager ally. Meanwhile, the Nazis are generally portrayed as using terror to bend a modern civilization to their agenda; yet we recognize that Hitler was initially popular. Amid these contradictions, where is the truth?
A growing body of scholarly research, some based on careful analysis of Nazi records, is clarifying this complex history.2 It reveals a convoluted pattern of religious and moral failure in which atheism and the nonreligious played little role, except as victims of the Nazis and their allies. In contrast, Christianity had the capacity to stop Nazism before it came to power, and to reduce or moderate its practices afterwards, but repeatedly failed to do so because the principal churches were complicit withââ¬âindeed, in the pay ofââ¬âthe Nazis.
Most German Christians supported the Reich; many continued to do so in the face of mounting evidence that the dictatorship was depraved and murderously cruel. Elsewhere in Europe the story was often the same. Only with Christianityââ¬â¢s forbearance and frequent cooperation could fascistic movements gain majority support in Christian nations. European fascism was the fruit of a Christian culture. Millions of Christians actively supported these notorious regimes. Thousands participated in their atrocities.
What, in Godââ¬â¢s name, were they thinking?
Before we can consider the Nazis, we need to examine the historical and cultural religious context that would give rise to them.
continued here: [url="http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/paul_23_4.html"]http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/paul_23_4.html[/url]
2005-02-10 17:02 | User Profile
Petr,
I believe the first quote was made before he came to power...This according to an Associated Press article in a local newspaper dated February 20, 1999 P.A-6.
The second quote Hitler made as Reich Chancellor.
Source I: The Fuhrer, by Konrad Heiden, 1944 P.494, Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc. Source II: Adolf Hitler, by John Toland, 1976 P.961, Ballantine Books paperback edition
Some other top National Socialist officials besides Himmler who were Catholic, and never removed their names from the church roles were Martin Bormann and Joseph Goebbels...Neither were they excommunicated for being a Nazi.
Source: Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews, James Carroll, 2001 P.437, Houghton Mifflin Company
Here's something else I discovered. One-quarter of the Third Reich's elite SS troop were Catholics....Could all of these been anti-Christians?
Source: Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, John Cornwell, 1999 P.215, Viking
Man no wonder Jews get more than a little antsy when a Catholic film like Mel Gibson's 'Passion of Christ' comes along.
As always Petr I appreciate your insight.
2005-02-10 18:14 | User Profile
I accept everything that happens in this world because we are on Earth and if everything was "perfect" we would then be in heaven.
Life on Earth is like walking a long road with many rocks in your way and bridges that you have to cross.
If you do accept the world as is and you don't like it then you must do something about it and even if you sometimes do fail at least you know that you tried to do something about it and that in itself will make you feel better, and maybe you even learned another way to try and solve the problem and another door will open up for you.
As you guys know I write a lot about myself, I have done a lot of good and bad and because the best teacher that I have had is life in itself I have accepted the fact that I am only human and no one special.
The only real weight that I carry in my backpack are the Zionists and I which that I didn't feel this way about them, it is not the fact that they are Zionists but for what they are doing as Zionists to others.....they are putting the world in a great danger and I see no end to this.
2005-02-12 18:48 | User Profile
No one's perfect Ponce...In my 63 years on this earth, I can assure you I did a lot of bad things, especially in my hard drinking days.
But you know what? Since I quit my heavy drinking many years ago, and got right with God, I don't get into so much trouble anymore. :thumbsup:
2005-02-12 19:14 | User Profile
All of this "Hitler quote mongering" is only to support someone's preconceived notions without any thought as to what Hitler was actually up to - politics.
Since Hitler was a politician, it would be impolitic of him to publicly denounce Christianity. Ergo, public quotes praising Christianity were for public consumption only, and don't prove anything about his actual beliefs.
Likewise, mocking folkish neo-pagans hardly makes Hitler pro-Christian, since atheists or agnostics would also not believe in gods, and in fact many "pagans" and others of a more spiritual bent (ie, those who have a spiritual life but who don't believe in literalist religions) also don't literally believe in personified dieties of any type, Christian or pagan. Such a person would "mock" all believers in religious literalism, whether "pagan" or Christian.
It just wasn't politic at that time to be too open about some of the absurdities of Christian literalists as it was of neo-pagan literalists.
Martin Bormann's quotes are unverifiable and may be selective, but they have a greater chance of being accurate of Hitler's actual views than any public statements he might have made while engaging in political activity.
2005-02-12 19:24 | User Profile
Someone with a more educated and balanced view.
This board is full of nazis. The same murderous lying sinking ignorant thinking the church and Hitler had and maintains to this day.
I am appalled and the lack of knowledge shown here. There are folks in here who do not know that Jesus is a JEW, and these what we tout are Jewish scriptures and that Christianity so called, is a Judaic Sect.
Basically, the belief that the God's law has been done away or changed by Jesus has been the perpertrator of this sort of murderous thinking.
And yet there is no scripture anway to show this is true. None.
God does not change, nor does his Law, nor does his Sabbaths Feasts or Fesitvals.
Hitler patterned his destruction of millions on what Martin Luther wrote, who patterned his filth on what John Crysostom wrote. And therefore people on this board pattern their "knowledge" on the teachings of men not God.
The same way that Hitler did.
[QUOTE=vytis]Petr,
I believe the first quote was made before he came to power...This according to an Associated Press article in a local newspaper dated February 20, 1999 P.A-6.
The second quote Hitler made as Reich Chancellor.
Source I: The Fuhrer, by Konrad Heiden, 1944 P.494, Carroll & Graf Publishers, Inc. Source II: Adolf Hitler, by John Toland, 1976 P.961, Ballantine Books paperback edition
Some other top National Socialist officials besides Himmler who were Catholic, and never removed their names from the church roles were Martin Bormann and Joseph Goebbels...Neither were they excommunicated for being a Nazi.
Source: Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews, James Carroll, 2001 P.437, Houghton Mifflin Company
Here's something else I discovered. One-quarter of the Third Reich's elite SS troop were Catholics....Could all of these been anti-Christians?
Source: Hitler's Pope: The Secret History of Pius XII, John Cornwell, 1999 P.215, Viking
Man no wonder Jews get more than a little antsy when a Catholic film like Mel Gibson's 'Passion of Christ' comes along.
As always Petr I appreciate your insight.[/QUOTE]
2005-02-12 20:17 | User Profile
[QUOTE=grep14w]All of this "Hitler quote mongering" is only to support someone's preconceived notions without any thought as to what Hitler was actually up to - politics.
Since Hitler was a politician, it would be impolitic of him to publicly denounce Christianity. Ergo, public quotes praising Christianity were for public consumption only, and don't prove anything about his actual beliefs. So you're saying the man was an opportunistic liar, and politician of the lowest sort? Hardly makes much sense then to treat his reputed skeptical views as positive supports for one's own position then does it? Unless you implicitely admit you're the same.
The view of Nazism as irreducably anti-religious expressed in quotes like this just doesn't address issues like these or Albion's quote
[I]A growing body of scholarly research, some based on careful analysis of Nazi records, is clarifying this complex history.2 It reveals a convoluted pattern of religious and moral failure in which atheism and the nonreligious played little role, except as victims of the Nazis and their allies. [/I]
Likewise, mocking folkish neo-pagans hardly makes Hitler pro-Christian, since atheists or agnostics would also not believe in gods, and in fact many "pagans" and others of a more spiritual bent (ie, those who have a spiritual life but who don't believe in literalist religions) also don't literally believe in personified dieties of any type, Christian or pagan. Such a person would "mock" all believers in religious literalism, whether "pagan" or Christian. True it doesn't mean make Hitler a Christian personally. But his words here certainly seem in practical opposition regarding the party's religious position to some of the strong anti-clerics within the Party, of which Bormann was one.
It just wasn't politic at that time to be too open about some of the absurdities of Christian literalists as it was of neo-pagan literalists.
Martin Bormann's quotes are unverifiable and may be selective, but they have a greater chance of being accurate of Hitler's actual views than any public statements he might have made while engaging in political activity.[/QUOTE] And even with such selectivity, these views are still seem articulate in opposition to the more radical anti-clerics in the party, although he personally professes doubts. (The way an awful lot of political figures do today). And its not like Hitler couldn't take the lead on many issues that weren't widely popular at the time if he chose to. Typical neo-pagans today take what they like, and ignore what they don't like.
I think its also significant of course the likelihood of the anti-clerical element in the party being manipulated and led by people like Bormann who were undeniably so close to the Soviets that their allegience was questioned even at the tme, and who today appear to have actual Soviet agents, is certainly similar to today's situation. I think its quite likely that the anti-religious element in WN is pretty much being led by the nose by some clever AP's in the movement. Their views and actions have all the tell-tale signs of contemporary judeo-atheism. The viewpoints on religion of Das Kapital and Mein Kampf are hardly equivalent, however much those of modern day VNN types are.
2005-02-12 21:38 | User Profile
[B][I] - "Hitler patterned his destruction of millions on what Martin Luther wrote, who patterned his filth on what John Crysostom wrote." [/I] [/B]
Ridiculous nonsense. Who taught you that PC pap, or did you come up with it on your?
Luther and Chrysostom did [B]not [/B] advocate the annihilation of Jews (or anyone else) as a race, but rather weeding out the Talmudic religion.
Luther and Chrysostom wrote against [COLOR=Red][B]Judaizers[/B][/COLOR] [B]just like you [/B] who wanted Christians to supplicate before Pharisaic imposters.
Luther's book "[I]The Jews and Their Lies[/I]" begins like this:
[COLOR=Indigo]"I had made up my mind to write no more either about the Jews or against them. But since I learned that those miserable and accursed people do not cease to lure to themselves even us, that is, the Christians, I have published this little book, so that I might be found among those who opposed such poisonous activities of the Jews and who warned the Christians to be on their guard against them. [B]I would not have believed that a Christian could be duped by the Jews into taking their exile and wretchedness upon himself. [/B] However, the devil is the god of the world, and wherever God's word is absent he has an easy task, not only with the weak but also with the strong. May God help us. Amen. "[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.humanitas-international.org/showcase/chronography/documents/luther-jews.htm[/url]
Get it? Luther was enraged that some Christians had converted to Judaism.
Likewise, Chrysostom was first and foremost reacting to the aggressive Judaizing going on in Antioch in his days:
[COLOR=Blue]"(5) What is this disease? The festivals of the pitiful and miserable Jews are soon to march upon us one after the other and in quick succession: the feast of Trumpets, the feast of Tabernacles, the fasts. There are many in our ranks who say they think as we do. Yet [B]some of these are going to watch the festivals and others will join the Jews in keeping their feasts and observing their fasts[/B]. I wish to drive this perverse custom from the Church right now."[/COLOR]
[url]http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/chrysostom-jews6.html#HOMILY_II[/url]
How were Luther's and Chrysostom's opinions "filth"? Explain your position with some Biblical support, for they sure do back up his case with Scripture too.
Petr
2005-02-12 21:44 | User Profile
You think that because you beleived men and not the Scripture.
[size=3][color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]1Co 5:8[/size][/font][/color][/size][font=Arial][size=1] Therefore let us keep the[color=black] feast, not with[/color] old yeast, neither with the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the matzah of sincerity and truth.[/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1]What Feast then do you think Paul is talking about?[/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1]Where is the Scripture that God changed his Feast Days?[/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font]
[font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font] [font=Arial][size=1][/size] [/font]
2005-02-12 21:51 | User Profile
Take that, Judaizer:
(Colossians 2)
[COLOR=Indigo][B]2:16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
2:17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ. [/B] [/COLOR]
Petr
2005-02-12 21:56 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Petr]Blah blah blah. Adolf might have known something about 20th century neopagan poseurs, but he didn't know anything significant about Christianity.
Petr[/QUOTE]
LOL. Don't you mean Adolf's opinion is significant when it agrees with Petr?
2005-02-12 21:58 | User Profile
I explained my viewpoint already, Bardamu. There is no hypocrisy here.
Petr
2005-02-12 21:59 | User Profile
Paul was writing to the goy (pagans gentiles) that were coming into the faith, they were beginning to keep the Feasts of the Lord as in the Book of Leviticus and were being called names just like you called me.
Food to Paul would mean food that was clean according to scripture.
Passover is a shadow of the Body of Christ.
Rosh HaShannah is his return.
Paul writes after Jesus is Resurrected as the first fruits of those being raised, so what Feast of the Lord is he talking about?
[size=3][color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1][color=black]1Co 5:8[/color][/size][/font][/color][/size][color=black][font=Arial][size=1] Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old yeast, neither with the yeast of malice and wickedness, but with the matzah of sincerity and truth.[/size][/font][/color] [color=black][font=Arial][size=1][/size][/font][/color] [color=black][font=Arial][size=3] [/size][/font][/color]
2005-02-12 22:02 | User Profile
[QUOTE=SCRIPTURESEZ]Someone with a more educated and balanced view.
There are folks in here who do not know that Jesus is a JEW, and these what we tout are Jewish scriptures and that Christianity so called, is a Judaic Sect.
[/QUOTE]
Try and calm down, Mr Sez. There is nobody here that is unaware that Jesus was an ethnic Jew. What you are experiencing on this board, probably for the first time in your controlled media drenched existence, is freedom of discussion.
2005-02-12 22:08 | User Profile
Your Scriptural quoting practices are about as sincere as those of Jehovah's Witnesses - they also deny the full Deity of Lord Jesus Christ, do you happen to believe in it? A consistent Judaizer must deny that also, for "YHWH does not share His Glory with another," right?
Anyhow, let's look at the context of 1 Corinthians 5:8:
[B]5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?
5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, [U]as ye are unleavened.[/U] For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread [U]of sincerity and truth[/U].
5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:
5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. [/B]
It is abundantly clear that Paul is speaking [B]metaphorically[/B], talking about how important it is to purge out "leaven" from believer's life by not associating with wicked people.
Your legalistic interpretaion of that verse is laughable.
Petr
2005-02-12 22:10 | User Profile
I am calm. I live in Psalm 91.
I pray for you the same.
I am staying the on the Word. John 1:1
And I say again, God does not Change.
2005-02-12 22:21 | User Profile
I repeat my question: do you subscribe to the full divinity of Lord Jesus Christ, Scripturesez?
[I][B]- "I am calm. I live in Psalm 91."[/B][/I]
What a co-incidence, the lord and master of all Scripture-twisters also quoted Psalm 91:11-12 [I]out of context [/I] to Jesus while tempting Him in the desert - are you trying to tell us something here?
Petr
2005-02-12 22:26 | User Profile
Jesus is God.
[/size][size=3][color=#008080]Joh 1:2[/color][/size][size=3] The same was in the beginning with God.
[/size][size=3][color=#008080]Joh 1:3[/color][/size][size=3] All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made.
[/size]
2005-02-12 22:31 | User Profile
Exactly what kind of God - fully equal with other members of the Godhead?
Do you believe in Trinity, Scripturesez?
Petr
2005-02-12 22:35 | User Profile
The trinity regarding god as 3 persons in not found in Scripture.
God is one, the Father, The Son, The Holy Ghost
2005-02-12 22:41 | User Profile
Hey Scripturesez, here's a website just for you:
[url]http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/zionism.htm[/url]
[SIZE=4]HEBREW ROOTS MOVEMENT[/SIZE]
[COLOR=Purple][SIZE=3][B][I]Turn your back on Mount Calvary, Grab your feces paddle, Required by Moses' Law, And, run to Mount Sinai.[/I][/B][/SIZE][/COLOR]
[B]No heresy, since Peter left his pork chops to pamper Judaizers, promises to better captivate all of Christendom and pave the way for Antichrist-- Like this neo-Pharisaical cult.
[SIZE=3]INTRODUCTION: [/SIZE]
There is a rather new cultic phenomena taking place and growing rapidly. This is the Yahweh Movement, of what has been called the Hebrew Roots Camp. This is promoted by sub-christian gurus who are completely loonie on one extreme, while men like Marv Rosenthal promote the thing on the more rational side by promoting Zionism and Israeli statism in the Lord's Church. As in all cults, degrees of heresy exist, so all parties in this cult will claim they are different than the others and beg to be declared Kosher. Being a pork chop lover, I would not be the best one to declare anyone Kosher.
I want to make it very clear that this page is NOT about bashing Jews. Those Jews who accept Christ as their Savior, WITHOUT adding cultic trappings, are received into the promises of the Church like anyone else.
The problem is, a whole discipline of fiction has been wafted in over the Lord's Church by converted Jews at prophecy conferences and by cultic "Jesus Made me Kosher" types who claim a special place in the Lord's Church because of their Hebrew heritage. This is heresy.
Some alleged saints, who figure this cult out, later move on to hate Jews. How utterly stupid. Nor will we allow any jerk water latter day scholar to accuse us of not loving the Jewish people. This is a neat ploy used by degraded Judeo-Gentile apologists who realize they are on quick sand theologically. They attack the true believer who sees and exposes their Mother Goose doctrines. To them we say, "Repent, or you too shall perish."
We are not hearing from 95% of the Fundamental Baptists on this topic. Fundamental pastors are too busy hyping their bus ministry and shearing the sheep as frequently as possible. The Bible Church movement is inebriated by the prophecy conference speakers like Marv Rosenthal, and they don't notice this heresy-- "Just tell me when the next Passover demonstration is."
The Pentecostal and Charismatic Movement eat this heresy up. Why? Like tongues et al, this heresy feels good.
FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEL GOOD! -- GET THE RUSH
Play games with God's Name and the precious Name of Jesus Christ. It gives the local church a new and trendy hype to keep the groupies happy. "Blow the shofar," says the guru.
These people keep the feasts, keep the Passover, and make a mongrel cross between Law and Grace. But, they are very inconsistent. They don't kill the Passover, and they don't kill the daily sacrifice. I like to ask them where their feces paddle is. I have yet to find a Hebrew Roots junky who carries a feces paddle as Moses commanded the Jews.
Read the following carefully. Are you one of those who has made a cult of Jewishness in the Lord's Church?
[COLOR=Red]Philippians 3:2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the concision. [/COLOR] [/B]
Petr
2005-02-12 22:47 | User Profile
You are spirtualizing Levitcus and it can"t be done.
Paul was a Jew and not speaking Metaphorically, that is a greek roman teaching.
I know this is not easy, but you are telling me still that God has changed, he has not.
Jesus is God. He is the Angel of the Lord The burning Bush.
It is like you are not talking to me but to a JW who does not even have a correct Scripture.
Furthermore do you think Ezekial is lying?
[color=#008080][font=Arial]Eze 44:23[/font][/color][font=Arial] And they shall teach my people [color=#808080]the difference[/color][/font][font=Arial] between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean. [/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial]Eze 44:24[/font][/color][font=Arial] And in controversy they shall stand in judgment; [color=#808080]and[/color][/font][font=Arial] they shall judge it according to my judgments: and they shall keep my laws and my statutes in all mine assemblies; and they shall hallow my sabbaths.[/font]
I don't understand why you think I am denying Jesus is God. John 1:1 says that is not true.
[QUOTE=Petr]Your Scriptural quoting practices are about as sincere as those of Jehovah's Witnesses - they also deny the full Deity of Lord Jesus Christ, do you happen to believe in it? A consistent Judaizer must deny that also, for "YHWH does not share His Glory with another," right?
Anyhow, let's look at the context of 1 Corinthians 5:8:
**5:6 Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? **
**5:7 Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, [u]as ye are unleavened.[/u] For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: **
**5:8 Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread [u]of sincerity and truth[/u]. **
**5:9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: **
**5:10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. **
It is abundantly clear that Paul is speaking metaphorically, talking about how important it is to purge out "leaven" from believer's life by not associating with wicked people.
Your legalistic interpretaion of that verse is laughable.
Petr[/QUOTE]
2005-02-12 22:50 | User Profile
[B][I] - "Paul was a Jew and not speaking Metaphorically, that is a greek roman teaching." [/I] [/B]
A desperate dodge. You seem to have a rather [B]low opinion [/B] of Hebrews if you think they were so incapable of metaphorical expressions - do you also take all Jesus Christ's parables literally?
More stuff on you Kosher Kultists:
[COLOR=DarkRed][SIZE=4]THE FOUNDER OF THE HEBREW ROOTS MOVEMENT-- SANBALLAT[/SIZE]
[B]By Steve Van Nattan[/B][/COLOR]
[url]http://www.blessedquietness.com/journal/housechu/sanballat.htm[/url]
Petr
2005-02-12 22:59 | User Profile
Not at all, I am say you (meaning me in the past) are looking at hebraic idioms with roman hellenistic eyes and through english language.
I am saying that God does not change, neither did his Feast Days, nor his Commands.
Genesis 1:14 The Hebrew word for seasons is moedim, a plural of moed which means appointed times. Levitcus tells us what those times are, those Feasts.
We have had the Feasts of the Lord removed from us, as well as the names of days, and years and method of keeping time.
This is the Roman Empire a spirtual system still in full blast.
And now after 3,500 as predicted by the prophets the knowledge returns in these last days.
No one here so far can answer me about what they should keep.
I have only seen so far what the church teaches. and most us did not know that the word church is ekkesiastia which means the called out ones.
Jesus kept the Feasts. And if its's good enough for Jesus it's good enough for me.
2005-02-12 23:18 | User Profile
Here's a very thorough and serious discussion for you, Scripturesez, if you happen to be interested in any kind of real study on this issue:
[SIZE=4]Good Question…[I]does the NT contradict the Hebrew Bible in its discussions of the 'passing away' of the Mosaic Law[/I]?[/SIZE]
[url]http://www.christian-thinktank.com/finaltorah.html[/url]
Petr
2005-02-13 05:23 | User Profile
None whatsoever.
If there was, then the New Testament, which is actually the renewed covenant does not go against what you call the Old Testament Scriptures.
After all the New Testament are stories and letters written about the Conception (Hannukah) the Birth (Feast of Tabernacles) the death, (Passover) and the Resurrection (Feast of First Fruits) and Pentecost (Shauvot) By the way Jesus was celebrating also the Feast of Tabernacles, after all these are his Feasts and he kept them all exactly.
Actually you are keeping most of God's commands, I don't mean the Ten Commandments (which are indexes to the rest) but most, that is if you have not committed adultery or fornication or hate God and so forth or not repented repaired and stopped those things.
But what has really happened is that you are not keeping some selected commands, such as the The Feasts of the Lord, and what is clean and unclean and so forth.
What can we really do about this? Ask Jesus. He will tell you. He wants to hear from us and actually we are commanded to hear his voice.
That would be the bottom line. Ask God.
I was just thinking, do you ever wonder why in most "churches" that is not being taught, nor is healing or miracles or anything much about Jesus.
Because it has all passed away because Jesus fulfilled the law and no healings happen and no miracles happen and no prophecy or tongues or music or dancing and its all just for the hereafter.
Makes you wonder what all those folks in the above sort of churches are here after.
But Ask Jesus if you want the truth.
God has not changed.
2005-02-13 11:45 | User Profile
Hanukkah has nothing to do with the conception of our Lord, and comes from a non-canonical book to boot. You seem to have made that up all by yourself to blindly imitate Jews.
And what do you think, should we build a new temple in Jerusalem to perform Levitical sacrifices? They are also commanded in Torah, you know.
Petr
2005-02-13 17:24 | User Profile
You are in error. But you can never answer except for going back quoting humans. The teachings of men not God.
2005-02-13 17:31 | User Profile
Your latest post didn't answer to anything.
Do you think the death of Christ did away with Levitical sin offerings? What about the feast of Yom Kippur?
Why should Christians celebrate Hanukkah?
Do you think that a Jew can be saved if he/she does not accept Jesus Christ as his/her Savior?
Petr
2005-02-13 18:25 | User Profile
QUOTE=Petr]Your latest post didn't answer to anything. God says:
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:2[/size][/font][/color][size=3][font=Arial][size=1] "Speak to the children of Yisra'el, and tell them, 'The set feasts of the LORD, which you shall proclaim to be holy convocations, even these are my set feasts.[/size][/font]
[/size][font=Arial]Lev 23:4 "'These are the set feasts of the LORD, even holy convocations, which you shall proclaim in their appointed season. [/font] [color=blue] [/color] [color=blue][/color] [color=blue]Do you think the death of Christ did away with Levitical sin offerings?[/color]
There is no Temple now so there are no sacrifices.
Yeshua is a finshed work. He is our atonement. .
[color=blue]What about the feast of Yom Kippur?[/color]
Why would you not keep Yom Kippur? In celebration for Yeshua being our blood sacrifice. There is no temple for animals sacrifice. The muslims sit on it.
Offer up the sacrifice of praise for what He has done for us. Besides it is a command for you forever:
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:24[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] "Speak to the children of Yisra'el, saying, 'In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, shall be a solemn rest to you, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, a holy convocation. [/color][/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:25[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] You shall do no regular work; and you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD.'" [/color][/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:26[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] The LORD spoke to Moshe, saying, [/color][/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:27[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] "However on the tenth day of this seventh month is Yom Kippur: it shall be a holy convocation to you, and you shall afflict yourselves; and you shall offer an offering made by fire to the LORD. [/color][/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:28[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] You shall do no manner of work in that same day; for it is Yom Kippur, to make atonement for you before the LORD your God. [/color][/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:29[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] For whoever it is who shall not deny himself in that same day; shall be cut off from his people. [/color][/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Lev 23:30[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1][color=#000000] Whoever it is who does any manner of work in that same day, that person I will destroy from among his people. [/color][/size][/font]
[/size][/size][/font][/color][/size][size=3][font=Arial][size=1].[/size][/font]
[color=blue]Why should Christians celebrate Hanukkah?[/color]
That is his conception. The Festival of Lights, He is the Light, the Lamp that stepped down into the Darkeness for us. He celebrates His Feast and went to the Feast as it is all about Jesus
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Joh 10:23[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1] It was winter, and Yeshua was walking in the temple, in Shlomo's porch. [/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Joh 10:24[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1] The Judeans therefore came around him and said to him, "How long will you hold us in suspense? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly." [/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Joh 10:25[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1] Yeshua answered them, "I told you, and you don't believe. The works that I do in my Father's name, these testify about me. [/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Joh 10:26[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1] But you don't believe, because you are not of my sheep, as I told you. [/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Joh 10:27[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1] My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. [/size][/font]
[color=#008080][font=Arial][size=1]Joh 10:28[/size][/font][/color][font=Arial][size=1] I give eternal life to them. They will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. [/size][/font]
This is why people cannot recognize so called christians because they celebrate feasts that are not of the LORD
Likewise. The Feast of Tabernacles is when Yeshua Was Born, the Word Made Flesh When He Tabernacled with us.
He was not in a manger, He was in a sukkah a booth a tabernacle
[color=blue]Do you think that a Jew can be saved if he/she does not accept Jesus Christ as his/her Savior?[/color]
No, but then [color=red]you [/color]do not know if a person, Jew or Gentile or Muslim or Hawiaan for that matter accepts him or not or when.
God does not change. Your doctrines changed God and His Feasts. He is One God He is JESUS
Tell me what are the commands of God as in Rev. 14:12
God does not change.
Petr[/QUOTE]
2005-02-13 18:50 | User Profile
[B][I] - "God does not change. Your doctrines changed God and His Feasts. He is One God He is JESUS Tell me what are the commands of God as in Rev. 14:12" [/I] [/B]
Are you picking and choosing what Mosaic commandments you hold onto?
[COLOR=Blue][B]James 2:10: For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. [/B] [/COLOR]
You are saying that we cannot celebrate Yom Kippur since "there is no temple for animals sacrifice".
These other festivals that you are advocating also require sin-offerings and a pilgrimage to Jerusalem!
Let's take the Pentecost, for example:
(Leviticus 23)
[COLOR=Navy][B]23:10 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest: 23:11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it. 23:12 And ye shall offer that day when ye wave the sheaf an he lamb without blemish of the first year for a burnt offering unto the LORD.
...[/B] [/COLOR]
How exactly do you celebrate "[I]Shavuot[/I]"? Do you sacrifice any sheep? Do you go to Jerusalem?
Petr
2005-02-15 22:57 | User Profile
To keep this simple, you can go to Jerusalem all you want, but you cannot make sacrifices there is no Temple that is Holy at this time. The Muslims sit there.
But you can keep the Feasts with the sacrifice of praise for what Yeshua has done for you! Repent of your sins and be joyful he is your Yeshua (salvation)
Since Yeshua is a priest on the order of Mechelzadik he will certainly can direct you if you hear is voice.
Yeshua is the Holy Spirit: (God in One, correct?)
Therefore it is written:
Ezekial 36 24 " 'For I will take you out of the nations; I will gather you from all the countries and bring you back into your own land. 25 I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols. 26 I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. 27 And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws.
If not, why don't we see Yeshua dyeing easter eggs?
Easter is a pagan based holiday.
2005-02-15 23:42 | User Profile
I repeat:
[I]"How exactly do you celebrate "Shavuot"? [/I]
Petr
2005-02-20 14:57 | User Profile
I celebrate Shauvot, the Giving of the Law on Mt Sinai by singing and dancing and praising the Lord for the Festival of Shauvot, and in thanksgiving for pouring out His Spirt on me and the knowledge of who Jesus is, the Son of God, the Holy One of Israel, The Angel of The Lord, The rock in the Wilderness, that all can have a that Spiritual Drink and guidance.
I was freed from Vanlentines Day, April Fools, New Years Eve and its resolutions as well as any pagan based festival, of any kind whatsoever.
No sacrifices, no Temple. For it is unclean.
By the way do you know the story of the Maccabees?
Antiochus Epiphanes descrescrated the Temple by dragging in unclean practices, a few of these are:
Image of another god (that looked like Antiochus by the way) cooked a sow pig on the alter forced priests to eat pork, and murder of those who did not worship Antiochus and his Image of Anitochus
Sound like what is going on today?
What does it say in Revelations? and Image will be set up in the Temple and many will be deceived.
We are told that the Temple was retaken and rebuilt, and those Temple stones were buried somewhere on the Temple mount they could no longer be used they were unholy and unclean. New ones were set up.
So the Muslims are on the Temple now, and therefore the Temple is unclean.
Jesus is God is the fiery Lawgiver and not one jot or title has passed away.
Ask Jesus he will tell you.