Let’s Rewrite History: Hitler and Lenin

Let’s rewrite it back to what is was before it was rewritten.  Or, just rewrite it to fit my own bias.  You can decide.

Hitler said he was a Christian.  Many pundants now say he was an atheist.  Mostly, he was neither.  

Lenin and the Communists are referred to as “atheists”. They, like Hitler, might have thought of themselves, personally, as Christians.  Like Hitler, they were mostly neither.  Like Hitler, they had other things on their minds.

The Communists came to power with economic, not religious, goals.  In trying to reach their economic goals, they ran into political resistance.  Some was from the Church.

So, like Hitler’s decision to publicize his religious convictions, Communists made the pragmatic decision to abolish a group that criticized their economic goals. This was the church.

Both Hitler and Lenin/Stalin were politicans, as well as evil dudes.  They used persuasion and the power of government to bring about the changes they wanted. Hitler wanted to restore the “greatness” that German’s might have thought they had before WWI.  Lenin wanted to redistribute income and wealth.  Probably both thought they would be very popular for their efforts.

Today it is popular to say that  Communists were atheists. The implication being that atheists are Communists. People like me amuse themselves by pointing out that Hitler was a Christian. The implication being that Christians are like Hitler.

What does Hilter’s Christianity and the Lenin/Stalin persecution of Christians have to do with today’s Christians and atheists?  Actually, nothing. 

The sooner we stop linking these historical villians to either point of view the better off we will be.

Avatar of Jon Lindgren

About Jon Lindgren

I am a former President of the Red River Freethinkers in Fargo, ND, a retired NDSU economics professor and was Mayor of Fargo for 16 years. There is more about me at Wikipedia.com.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Let’s Rewrite History: Hitler and Lenin

  1. entech says:

    I think there is a common link between Stalin, Hitler, Torquemada et.al. Regardless of the direction their beliefs and ideologies took them they were all raving loonies (probably more accurate psych evaluations, psychopath etc.
    I don’t see how anyone can really think of themselves as decent human beings when they are prepared to bring on so much death and destruction because other human beings fail to accept the validity of their beliefs or ideology.
    If you feel the need to punish me for my own good and that it hurts you more than it hurts me then please leave me alone and do it to yourself.
    David

  2. Tyler says:

    John,

    A simple reading of “The Communist Manifesto” and anything by Karl Marx in which “Communisim” was completely organized around and you will find that embedded all over his language is a hatred of religion and specifically “Christianity”. Marx is extremely explicit about this again and again and again in his writings and teachings and directly links religion to being “Central” to the problem. The idea that you can dismiss the motivations of organized communists as “Purely Economic” is ludicrous. The “Only” reason you want to do this is you very smartly realize that the crimes of Explicitly Atheistic Regimes are getting “Under-the- Sunlight”…and one is finding their historical deeds…indeed horrific. Furthermore, you are seeing the futile attempts by “The New Atheists…actually the losing pop-culture viability New Atheists” in debates to lump “Murdering Islam” and “Christians Together” as well as advancing the idea that all wars and violence are caused by religion. With just a basic understand of history one can prove this not only wrong but how the explicitly atheistic regimes of “Communist and Socialists” were extremely efficient at killing more people in the shortest period of time in the entire history of the human race on earth…..Yet one is to believe that the real evil is “Cardinal Newman in the confessional booth giving absolution, presiding over mass, or in his study”.

    Ridiculous…

    Meanwhile despite its many failings the Catholic Church can only point to a history that is manifestly filled with the altruistic positive more than the negative.

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Tyler 3:03 AM Thanks for the comment. We certainly see both history and current events differently. Karl Marx was an ecnomist, not a theologian. Economics happens to be my field. He saw the Christian establishment defending the economic establishment. I think we could agree that would not be the first time that has happened. His ideas in economics live on–but he contributed nothing to the ideology of religion or anti religion that has endured. On “The New Atheists.. actually losing the pop-culture viabiability New Atheists”, I can’t quite understand what you are saying here. Surveys by the Pew Center keep reporting that the percentage of the population that identify with no religion are the fastest growning segement of the population and established Christian demoninations are falling by one percent or so each year. If this represents some influence of the New Atheists, it seems like they are doing just fine.

      • Tyler says:

        Jon,

        I realize you are an educated Economist but Karl Marx was not formally educated as an “Economist”. He was educated in Philosophy formally. He is an autodidact
        in Economic, Social and Political Sciences. (I believe I am correct on this) I have not studied his economic theories to closely but and I guess if you view his theories on “The Destruction of the concept of “Property or Ownership” as Economic…I guess they are but I would like to know what field of Economics begins with the concept of the human motivations on supply/demand of “Ownerless Assets”. This seems to be a purely “Philosophic Ideas” I’m sure there is a sound economic theory in there somewhere I guess.

        As insight into his “Motivations”. He was explicitly “Anti-Religious/Anti-God” and I maintain as do other historians that his hatred of Creator and a “Creators UnJust World” were central to his philosophical and economic theories. For example, one can look at the fact that when he was a young man, he was a lover and poetry writer of “Prometheus”, which Marx saw as the embodiment of Atheistic Humanism. To Marx in one of his poem’s about Prometheus,
        “Then I will wander “Godlike” and victorious”
        “Through the world”
        “And, giving my words an active force,”
        “I will feel EQUAL to the creator”

        More quotes from Marx this time from his Doctoral Thesis in Philosophy:
        “I hate all Gods…I would much rather be bound to a rock, than to be the docile valet of Zeus the Father…Prometheus is the first saint, the first martyr on the calendar of Philosophy”.

        Another Quote from Marx: “Atheism is a negation of God and seeks to assert by this negation the existence of man”.

        More quotes from Marx this time tying his “Economic Theories” as you mentioned to his “Atheism”directly I might add, quote: “AS IN RELIGION, man is governed by the products of his own brain, so in capitalistic production, he is governed by the products of his own hand….Money is the alienated essence of man’s labor and life, and this alien essence dominates him as he worships it”.
        On the strength of birthing a godless secular value framework to work from, Marx seemed to have a problem reconciling it to himself there as well, unless the following behaviors are part of “The Secular Norm” than he did a bang up job:

        The “Married” Marx, great moral humanist that he was ,had his fourth child with his “Housekeeper” and tried to get his buddy Engels (A serial womanizer and self-described hedonist himself) to take the blame..eventually he got the Housekeeper to give up the child for adoption instead of taking his child into his home.
        On his abilities to apply his Godless Secular Humanism values on the rest of his family. Even though he had money..most of his children died before him including two daughters that committed suicide. He was notoriously hated by his friends and aquaintenances for his business dealings. 11 people were present at his funereal.

        I might add, as mentioned previously, his atheistic utopian ideas and theories when applied, and I maintain were fueled by his Atheism as to other historians, have killed over 100 million people efficiently within a century and counting.

        I will look into your Pew Center statistics but I will maintain that, like the New Atheists, which are now becoming so “Yesterday” to our short-attention spanned latest pop-culture citizenry. This has been mentioned lately. I will cop to the fact that they have done some damage out there but this is because people are woefully educated both on religion & philosophy these days. Why? For the willfully ignorant “Moral Relativism” is an easy, unthinking, comfortable garment to wear that has been thrown down to the masses by the intelligentsia. For the educated, “Scientific Materialism” is the tailored garment of choice but has many many failings and completely falls on its head when confronted by anybody who has a basic understanding of “The Philosophy of Science” and other competing Philosophies and Metaphysics.

        Catholicism in the latest survey was gaining ground…albeit slowely 1%. Mainline Protestantism is going to die..they have been suckered by militant secularists and their theologies and doctrines have become shiftless and ridiculous…yet curiously they still reach out and want to negotiate with people like you by adopting more of your ideas into their “Christianity”.

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Tyler 2:55 “Ownerless assets” is one of a few central concepts of economics. Are things to be owned in common or owned individually? All our highways are ownerless assets. I’ve seen Karl Marx ranked among the top most influential economists of all time. He had what you might call the whole economic man in his sites. We can each have our perspectives, but I don’t share your view that his dislike of religion had an influence in his economics. If he had been a devout Chrisitian, he would have come to the same conclusions so far as I can see. From his point of view, capitalists could not stop themselves from starving the workers. The workers had no choice but to destroy the capitalists. God, or no God, the outcome was the same. Today, either atheists or Christians could read Marx and either could like or dislike what he had to say.

          • Tyler says:

            I learned something about Economics today…though I would say that if Christians embraced the idea of “Ownerless Assets” than they would potentially be breaking several of the commandments regarding respecting the property of others and also committing the mortal sins associated with “Envy” and “Jealously”. Same goes for Jews.

  3. PK says:

    Tyler, I’m a Christian, but not a Catholic. Could an atheist be an atheist, but not a Marxist? If you look into the Jesuit Order(IHS)(Isis,Horus,Seb) and the secret societies they created, you will find that they were deeply involved with Hitler and Stalin. It’s not fair to say that the atheistic communists are the main enemy, while completely excusing the Vatican’s “failings” based on the good deeds they’ve done. One needs more than a basic understanding of history to comprehend all the players on the grand chessboard.

    • PK says:

      The Roman Empire never ended, it just changed.

    • Wanna B Sure says:

      PK; The letters IHS are a monogram of the name “Jesus Christ”. There are ancient variations of this, Jesus, or Christ, (Greek or Latin,) the Chi-roh for example. These were used from the earliest Christian times. As was the “FISH” symbol. I have been told by some ill-informed, that the “fish” symbol is a symbol “to become fishers of men”, but truth be told , the historical meaning is; Ichthys, in Greek meaning Jesus Christ, God’s Son, Savior. The Jesuites are from the sixteenth century. Your application of a pagan content is interesting, if not consperitorial. Would it be possible to share context, and sources? As a young student around the table, someone jokingly applied the meaning of “I Hate School” to the IHS. Knowing full well that this was not true, but it is a good example as to how easy it is for content to be detoured.

      • PK says:

        The Jesuit symbol itself is a sun symbol. With the male and female aspects of the sungod depicted with the strait and squiggly rays. The fish symbol could represent Dagon. Another pagan deity, where the priests of Dagon wore fish miters. It appears these miters are still used today.
        http://amazingdiscoveries.tv/media/123/211-100K/
        This is a lecture that puts some information together rather nicely and shows the connection to paganism.

        • Wanna B Sure says:

          Walter veith? 7th day Adventist. I now understand where you are coming from. Yes, you certainly have a different twist on things. Even every error has an element of truth, otherwise it couldn’t be successful. I can take a hand calculator, and make any number mean something than the original sum by manipulation. Your violent anti Christian, and Catholicism specifically in this case, is revealed in your current application . One could easily take the letters; s, h, i, and t, and make a monogram to fit whatever one desires, but that doesn’t take away from the original intent, or content. I know I can’t change your mind, nor do I intend to. Your biases are too firmly entrenched I suppose. If that gives you security, good luck with that. There are other web sites that promote the same take as yours on the IHS. I have seen these. Some of them are adherents to Alien earth invasion. Does your definition of God have it’s source in the constellation of Gorkon? No my friend, someone in your group had a “eureka” moment, and said “let’s use this ” as an argument against historical Christianity. All Sects need an enemy to grow, and the Church Universal is your enemy. Shakespeare probably said it best when he said, “Let a man speak long enough, and he will prove even to himself to be a fool”.

          • PK says:

            I don’t know when i’ve ever said anything anti-Christian, against Jesus or the Bible. Perhaps anti-man-established institutions, but not anti-Christian.
            There is paganism in the church and you can’t disagree, so why are you calling me a fool for just suggesting the possibility IHS surrounded by a sun symbol stands for a pagan trinity? It’s not just the symbols, they’re secondary, it’s the doctrine that’s pagan as well. The Catholic church has changed the sabbath, has changed the Law, has elevated Mary to a goddess and says man can now forgive sins(blasphemy). They also teach the pagan doctrine about death. And no my biases aren’t too firmly entrenched, i’m open to any contradicting information. If paganism was incorporated into the church to attract new people, then why 2000 years later hasn’t it been removed. The 2nd Commandment clearly condemns it and Catholicism has removed it from their Catechism. Your comments about aliens and such were just inappropriate. You being an expert on historical Christianity, didn’t nearly all the founding fathers of protestantism point directly to the Papacy as being the anti-Christ? Based off of the Bible, because it fits every Biblical description of such? Perhaps i am just a deceived fool, but there’s a chance you’re no better off.

          • Wanna B Sure says:

            PK; You accuse Historic Christianity of be influenced by paganism. You possibly aren’t aware that you too are influenced by paganism every day of your life. A large part of our vocabulary has pagan connections, for example; every day of the week is named after either a Nordic, Greek, or Roman god/godess, as is every month of the year. If you wear “clothes”,(named after the Greek fates “clothos.” If your arm whithers, it’s called atrophy, named after the Greek fates “trophos”. Virtually all our language has Greek,and Roman root sources, through French, latin, and Germanic. Does that make you a pagan when you use these terms? No, nor does it make Christian terms pagan . Your take on the pre Christian “Trinity” is almost word for word from the Jehovah’s Witnesses book “Should you Believe in the Trinity. I have studied this in great depth, The premise is totally flawd, and the timelines of the evidence does not stand up to rebuttal. I notice too that you and yours have a fixation on the Sabbath. Well, you should be equally cautious about bearing false witness. Your “sabbath is on Saturday, (the day of Saturn), not when they met on the Lord’s day, (Sunday, on the day Christ rose from the dead. Do you worship Saturn? No I don’t believe you do. You do however use a calendar. I’ll give you a couple more examples- Wednesday/Oden’s day , Thursday, Thor’s day, Friday, Frigga’s day. When you accuse others of doing the same thing you do, you judge yourself. Your attention to Ellen G. White even surpasses Rome’s attention to Mary. White’s writings may not be Scripture in the pure sense, but her writings are a proven source of Adventist doctrine, and you selectively use the Bible to bolster that doctrine, while at the same time ignore the rest of Scripture that goes against those particular doctrines, and practices. Regarding the Anti-Christ; Look into the term “typology”. (The spirit of the Anti Christ). This my friend is not the ideal place to do polemics, or to “come let us reason”, as the time and space is too limited. I’m simply telling you that there is much more than what this site is beneficial to do. I realize that your sect has a heavy emphasis on demonizing anyone who doesn’t agree, or teach exactly as your sources teach. I also realize that there are some of your teachers that strongly discourage your members from objectively examining other Orthodox teaching, and Doctrines, and comparing them with yours. This I know, from past experiences with your people. The Jehovah’s Witnesses have an even stronger admonition against comparing. You and them have some similarities, coming from the close time frames of starting, and the zeitgiest of the time. Sooooo–my friend, do some honest comparative theology. You may discover there aren’t as many boogy-men out there as you have been lead to believe. When you point your finger at someone, you have three pointing right back at you. Peace.

          • PK says:

            First of all i’m not a 7th Day Adventist, and there are bad apples in every group so picking and choosing from these does not represent the whole. I just happen to agree with some of their fundamental Biblical interpretations. If i may clarify my position about the symbols. I’m not basing my opinion of Catholicism off their symbolism, but off their doctrine. The symbols seem to fall right in line with it and i thought you knew my position on the doctrine, so that’s why i brought them up.
            You never really addressed the pagan doctrines of Catholicism either. On the Sabbath, now yes, Christ rose on Sunday. Friday was the Passover that year, the day Jesus(the Lamb) was sacrificed before sundown. He rested in his grave on the Sabbath, Saturday. He rested on the Sabbath. On the 3rd day, Sunday he was resurrected. It’s not logical to change the Sabbath based on the day he was resurrected, it’s not Biblical. The Vatican even says it’s not Biblical and takes offense to anyone who says it is. Them changing the Sabbath in their own words is their “mark of authority”.
            I believe in the Trinity. Father, Son, Holy Spirit. Not the pagan Father, Mother, Son. That’s all I was saying.
            Ellen G. White is not worshiped or prayed to. So i don’t think she has surpassed Mary, but she is considered a prophetess by them.
            It’s true we could discuss Bible prophesy for days, but is labeling Catholicism as the false system the world will be forced to worship by the second beast such a stretch? Clearly it’s doctrine is Babylonian, it has changed times and laws and has exalted man above God. They’ve called for a New World Order. They were instrumental in setting up the U.N., who’s main goal is to create a world government AND a world religion. The connections are amazing. I would love to have a nice debate about Bible prophecy and doctrine with you since you seem to know quite a lot about religion. But i don’t appreciate you placing labels and stereotypes on me and talking to me like i’m stupid, i think i raise some valid points. Your input is appreciated and welcomed. Thanks.

          • Wanna B Sure says:

            PK ; you may want to take your concerns to a knowlegable Catholic. I’d be surprised if you got past chapter three of White’s book “The Great Controversey”. If you aren’t an Adventist, you then sound a little like a JW, or a Mormon. The similarities are striking in some areas. If you are just picking and choosing some from one, then another, the harmonizing of doctrine would almost be impossible.Error begets error. Have a nice Thor”stag. (that’s tomorrow).

          • PK says:

            Nope, just a free agent of Christ trying to figure out what exactly is going on. Why couldn’t every denomination have some beliefs right and the rest wrong? Why must someone pick just one, and believe everything unquestionably? I don’t understand that since you so strongly believe that i’m wrong, why you can’t explain the error in the points i make. Rather you divert from the main premise of my argument adding no real value to yours. Perhaps we should both reevaluate our current perceptions and not be so smug, we do both worship Jesus Christ.

          • Wanna B Sure says:

            PK You seem to have a fixation on errors, and then apply those percieved errors to everyone, deserved or not. This is my concern for you. So, when you judge one guilty of this, you include everyone. I wouldn’t be surprised that you are of the apocolyptic wing of Christianity, (dispensational Premillenialism), or some such emphasis, in your eschatological scheme of things. These things generally go hand in hand . I could be wrong, but that is the trend in your writing. yes. consperitorial, apocolyptic, and exclusivity. If you keep searching you may find a combination of doctrines that fit your desires. In the meantime, things that “tickle” your ears are not necessarily wholesome, or true.

          • PK says:

            You seem to be fixated on placing labels on someone so you can judge everything they say based off of your preconceived notion of the brand. You never really look into the evidence given, you just take what’s said and put a name to it, but never follow through with looking into it. You’ve been on my case this whole time but have never said anything related to my main arguments.
            Conspiracies have always been a part of history, to say there aren’t any now is ignoring history. The devil is the great deceiver, think about it. Yes i believe in an anti-Christ system coming to power, abolishing the 10 Commandments and persecuting Christians, ending with the coming of the Lord, to put an end to sin and to set up his eternal kingdom on this planet. That’s what i believe is written in the Bible. Not just in Revelations either. If that’s apocalyptic to you, then i would fit that label. Exclusivity? I told you your input is welcomed. I want to hear peoples opinions on the Bible and prophecy. I like having that debate, it’s how we learn. I know i don’t know everything, and i know you don’t either. So if you want to have a debate, lets have it on the Bible, not about what you’re going to label me under.

          • Wanna B Sure says:

            If it walks, and squawks—

          • PK says:

            You really got me with that one. Way to prove me wrong.

          • Wanna B Sure says:

            thank you ; mission accomplished.

          • PK says:

            You’re funny. I’ve shared some of my beliefs, so what do you believe in? What’s the Bible all about? What would you label yourself as? What will the end look like?

        • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

          Pk 1:57 I’m having a little trouble following your reasoning. You seem to see a difference between the origin of Catholic symbols and holidays and nonChathoic, but Christian, symbols and holidays. To say the Catholic things came from Pagans but the others did not strikes me as absurd. They ALL came from Pagans. Do you think the ideas of the early Christians were all original? I don’t know of any that were original. Now, I’m not saying I know a lot about all of these, but when it comes of art, which is the source of symbols, there is nothing new under the sun. All of them were used in the gazillion years of human history by someone. The Christians adapted the ones used by the Pagans. The Pagans adapted the ones used by the peoples before them. I think we’re needing a reality check here.

          • Wanna B Sure says:

            Yes; and I would like to add one thing. If a Satanic Priest wears underwear, and you wear underwear, does that make one a Satanic priest? No ! PK uses the words “could, and appears to validate his position. That is a far cry from is, and does. Everything is speculation, and hearsay to fit the anthesis. Synthesis is not an option.

          • PK says:

            When pagan doctrine is associated with the symbols, and after 2000 years it hasn’t been changed, should one even wonder or just go with tradition?

        • Tyler says:

          PK

          Please, you have been reading to much Dan Brown.

  4. entech says:

    Whatever makes anyone think that Marx was an atheist? He always denied it himself. His philosophy held that the material world was all that there was. He was one of “The Young Hegelians”, Hegel was an idealist – the material world derives from the ideal world, the world of God and that Christianity was the highest from. Marx described his philosophy as “turning Hegel upside down,” If as Marx thought this idealism was a product of the imagination how can you deny the existence of something that is already imaginary.

    His early life would have turned him against religion, the state religion was Lutheran and Jews were prohibited from many occupations, his father converted in order to work as a lawyer. Unfortunately this conversion took place in a district that was largely Catholic. A personal experience of the “alienation” which played a large part in his theories.

    He actually speaks little of religion in his journalism and economic works. The Communist Manifesto was actually a work commissioned by the Communist Party of Germany. The Manifesto mentions Christianity in only two paragraphs
    “When the ancient world was in its last throes, the ancient religions were overcome by Christianity. When Christian ideas succumbed in the eighteenth century to rationalist ideas, feudal society fought its death battle with the then revolutionary bourgeoisie. The ideas of religious liberty and freedom of conscience merely gave expression to the sway of free competition within the domain of knowledge.”
    And again on “Christian Socialism”
    “Nothing is easier than to give Christian asceticism a socialist tinge. Has not Christianity declaimed against private property, against marriage, against the state? Has it not preached in the place of these, charity and poverty, celibacy and mortification of the flesh, monastic life and Mother Church? Christian socialism is but the holy water with which the priest consecrates the heart-burnings of the aristocrat.”
    He writes of religion in general terms as in “Undoubtedly,” it will be said, “religious, moral, philosophical, and juridical ideas have been modified in the course of historical development. But religion, morality, philosophy, political science, and law, constantly survived this change.” Or as a tool of the rulers “As the parson has ever gone hand in hand with the landlord,…”

    Marx even had sympathy for religious feelings as the much misquoted and out of context “opium of the masses”.
    “Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.
    Karl Marx, Critique of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right

    In modern language give up your illusions and don’t pin your hopes on ‘pie in the sky when you die’.

    When Marx met some representatives of the growing Russian revolutionary he told them that their conditions were not right for his ideas, that if you tried to implement his ideas based on a capitalist system to an agrarian one mistakes would be made, how true. And, after meeting members of the European communist movement he said, “if they are Marxists then I am not”. You can’t blame Marx for the horrors done in his name any more than you can blame Jesus for the Inquisition.

    From Tylers first comment “A simple reading of “The Communist Manifesto” and anything by Karl Marx in which “Communisim” was completely organized around and you will find that embedded all over his language is a hatred of religion and specifically “Christianity”.
    A little too much Dinesh D’Souza in your diet, perhaps.
    David

    • Avatar of Jon Lindgren Jon Lindgren says:

      Untech 7:41 Thank you, David, for that wonderful review of the Communist Manifesto and the writings of Karl Marx. To identify the Communists with today’s atheists is an old political trick, “Throw your political enemies into the same box as a perceived villian. No one will know they have little in common.” An atheist, or an atheist group, will have a comprehensive explanation of the nature of man and his origin to to offset that of the popular religion. Thus, we have today the writings of Dawkins and before him many others. There is no such thing in Communist writings. As you note, they wrote little about religion, and, certainly did not flush out anything approaching a comprehensive essey on atheism. The relationship of Communists to atheism is the same as that between Hitler and Christianity. I’m repeating myself.

    • Tyler says:

      Entech,

      I made my documented points and quotes about Marx above. You may be write though..he may have been an implicit “Theist” and but it follows than per his own comments and motivations that he “Hated God” and therefore created an economic and political framework that was explicitly “Atheistic”, the people who organized as such, time and time again, demanded it.

      Jon & I guess David,

      1. Dawkins is a “Materialist” and a “Relativist” in one…two philosophies at odds with each other…even Sam Harris admits this.
      2. Communism is the organized political and economic “Outcome” of “Godlessness”. One can create an argument a step by step argument how the outcome was “inevitable” by first embracing a godless view of the universe. The Cribs note summary of that argument is simple but I’m sure I can sum up a more comprehensive point by point but here we go
      1. There is no God
      2. Man becomes God
      3. Man tries to create Utopia..(Heaven)
      4. Man kills lots of people in the effort.

      I realize Atheists saw that “Communism” didn’t work now they are working on “Socialism” and a soft-facisim that includes political correctness and “Thought Crimes” and “NewSpeak”. Its more incrementalism this time…but they are going to eventually over-reach.

      I already address Karl Marx’s own words above on his either “God Hatred” therefore his belief in a God or his eventual tired Atheism of his old age.

      Actually David I read in addition to DSouza
      Craig, Wiker, De Marco, Chesterton, Lewis, Malachi Martin, Phillip E Jonson, Bloom, Kreeft, Berlinski, Buckley, Adler, Sheen, Feser, Vox Day, and when I can get someone to break it down for me the oldies…Aquinas, Aristotle, Kant, Plato..and I suppose many others..

      You know all the great minds (At least some of those are great minds, and others are just sharp niche pop-culture commentators) that modern day university types suppress from the curriculum and whose ideas the MSM keep out of their stories, music and culture in general.

  5. entech says:

    PK. Inclined to agree with you on that. The empire became the universal church. It brought with it many of the old habits, denigration being one of them. When Rome built up its strength and defeated Carthage , the Carthaginians were betrayed as evil and depraved. When Israel was defeated, refused to succumb and were dispersed they suffered the same slanders; the church carried this forward and raised Jew-Hatred to a new level (Antisemitism is too polite an expression).
    David

    • Brad Campbell says:

      entech….interesting you bring up the Carthaginians and Rome. Rome would have never defeated Carthage if not for the fact that they captured a Carthage war ship (quinquireme) and “copied” it over and over with their vast resources. I love military history….:)

  6. Brad Campbell says:

    Hitler-Stalin-Lenin, Pol-Pot….all terrible human beings whether they were religious believers or not.

  7. Avatar of Kay Syvrud Kay Syvrud says:

    Nobody who carried out the atrocities Hitler did is a Christian! Even if he was “born” a Catholic….lots of people are born a Catholic, Methodist. Presbyterian, Swedish Covenant, Baptist, Lutheran…… but it doesn’t make then a true biblical Christian who truly follows the example and teachings of Jesus Christ. There are a ton of “nominal” Christians who do not know diddly-squat about the biblical teachings of Jesus Christ because they do not read the Bible, ever.
    They are Christian in name only.

  8. PK says:

    sorry i didn’t think it was posting. It was acting goofy there.

  9. Bullright says:

    “The Communists came to power with economic, not religious, goals.”

    That is strong and profound….and so true. People need reminding that economics is the basis for the modern Left as well. (I don’t think they have a good grasp on it but….) But the modern left tries to attribute all kinds of motives of empathy to social justice to themselves, while economics rules. The more they argue it is much more, the more it is all about that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>