During the "Monkey Trial" in Dayton OH in 1925, among the strongest supporters of William Jennings Bryant were the KKK. Religious fanatics, like the Taliban, Al Qaeda & Turkish clerics, are solidly anti-evolution. Just saying...
You're wasting your time trying to disprove the obvious Darwinism and Hitler, there are thousands of people who have their minds set on believing he was indeed a Chrisitan (Hitchens' sheep) and any evidence you can present is pointless. I made a similar video, and sometimes feel like I'm talking with religious fanatics when trying to reason with them.
Hitler was a cult leader who pushed the idea that humans of one particular region were arbitrarily superior to all others. He wanted people to believe in him and his message. That made any other beliefs his enemies including Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and yes, even the belief in nothing as those people did not believe in him.
Christians should be acutely aware of Hitler's false use of Darwinism to justify his horrors. The Bible has been so used numerous times in the past for the same thing
People like Hitler and the social dawrinists will use--or rather misuse--anything they can to forward their agenda. Just as the Bible has been misused to justify slavery, and the inquisition.
This video is as ignorant as using the Klan and the Inquisitions to argue against Christianity. Ben Stein and David Berlinski are such buffoons.
@UtubeIsRunByScum How is the Bible misused to to justify slavery? It clearly condones slavery as part of the social constructs of the day. It even documents what God commanded as to how masters are to treat there slaves. It also tells soldiers when it is permitted to take sex slaves from conquered tribes.
@foxlake02 I'm sure that the creationists who attack Darwin will have some response to that. The point is, they will argue that the Bible does not justify slavery. I was conceding the point to them in order to make my own point, about misuse of a principle.
@UtubeIsRunByScum I'll agree any politician including Hitler will misinterpret anything at his disposal to persuade gullible people but I really don't think you even have to misinterpret the Bible to justify slavery. It spells out how to go about enslaving and keeping slaves. Most modern fundamentalists ignore parts of the Bible like that but take the creation story literally.
@foxlake02 They do not ignore it. But you are ignorant. The words you speak of were for Israelites in ancient Israel. Jews. I don't know what you think 'Fundmentalist' means but all Christians today (and everyone else) certainly believes the Israelites were most definitely 'literally' instructed to do this.
Are you so stupid that you actually think its some kind of 'instruction' for Christians and they must somehow be 'ignoring it'? Wow you are fantastically ignorant of the Bible wow.
@ElProximo Thanks for admitting the Bible has accounts of God commanding a particular group of people to enslave other groups of people. And yes, I know Christians who have never read the particular verses that show God instructing people to enslave other people and even instructions on how to beat your slaves. watch?v=yQFI66E12sU
@foxlake02 You need to admit you were wrong. Christians (who study their bible) know the Israelites had all kinds of rules and laws and instructions for various military campaigns.
What happened here is that you were mistaken. You mistakenly believed that this was some kind of instruction for mankind. But you saw Christians abolished slavery and don't do it. So, you actually decided "Hmm they must not know what I know" LOL
Anyways, you got schooled and can't admit it? Lame.
@ElProximo Actually Christians used the Bible to justify slavery until the civil war. I think I know how people in my own experience have responded to verses like Leviticus 25:44-46 or Exodus 21:7-11. They simply did not know about them. It is ignored in their churches. Christians in any society will interpret their dogma to fit their sensibilities. It's nothing new. You can call me a liar and rewrite history all you want but it is your FAIL.
@foxlake02 But you were just caught lying about history. You just wrote: "Christians used the Bible to justify slavery until the civil war'.
In real history we know Christians abolish slavery as soon as they dominate Rome. Slavery becomes unheard of for most of western civlization until we get to an aberration - a handful of Europeans jump in on it and are promptly crushed by the Christian Abolitionists who fight and die to eliminate it (even worldwide).
@foxlake02 But you were just caught lying about history. You just wrote: "Christians used the Bible to justify slavery until the civil war'.
In real history we know Christians abolish slavery as soon as they dominate Rome. Slavery becomes unheard of for most of western civlization until we get to an aberration - a handful of Europeans jump in on it and are promptly crushed by the Christian Abolitionists who fight and die to eliminate it (even worldwide).
@ElProximo Slaveholders justified the practice by citing the Bible. That is not a lie it is an historical fact. They asked who could question the Word of God when it said, "slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling" - Ephesians 6:5, or "tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect"- Titus 2:9. Both the Union and the Confederacy invoked the Bible to justify their positions on slavery so how have I lied?
@foxlake02 Right and serial killers have tried to justify their actions and been rejected for it. You have, at best an aberration. Among that aberration (modern slavery in Christendom) you have a handful who actually tried to find bible verses to justify it. They were promptly and easily SMASHED by Christians who overwhelmingly won all hearts, minds and then died defeating them.
@ElProximo Lincoln never joined a church nor ever made a clear profession of Christian belief but he recognized as a practical matter, that we could not proclaim that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights...and continue this practice. Are you saying that God condemns slavery? I have never seen it in the Bible. I only hear contorted interpretations when social constructs deemed it necessary.
@foxlake02 I'm asking you why you are talking to me (and others) as if we understand slavery is something bad or something to be ashamed of?
You talk like slavery incriminates the bible. Why would you believe slavery was somehow 'morally wrong'?
Keep in mind for thousands of years slavery was just a 'given' and your video would be taken as 'boasting' how great the Israelites must have been for having slaves to throw around.
@ElProximo I already answered your question. Lincoln knew it was wrong as a practical matter. Society works better when all people are free to explore their full potential. Are you saying you would enslave people if you wasn't a Christian? What verses in the Bible tell you that it's not okay to enslave people now? How much would you sell your daughter for?
@foxlake02 Yes, we all know Abraham Lincoln was a dedicate Christian, constantly attended church and read from his Bible daily and quoted from it constantly. So we have a very good idea where he got ideas from.
And don't worry about me.
What you need to do is explain why you would think slavery was morally wrong (without borrowing from your Christian cultures morality). Yes, if I was an atheist I'd see slavery as something that could definitely benefit propagating my DNA.
@ElProximo Again, I answered your question. Are you reading my posts? I already explained as a practical matter, society is better off if every individual in it has a chance to reach his fill potential. Sorry to hear you would enslave people if you wasn't a Christian. It really doesn't make sense to me. What verses are you using to get the idea that God doesn't approve? Lincoln apparently embraced the "doctrine of necessity," but not much else in Christianity. I know you want to think he did.
@foxlake02 So you believe slavery is impractical (not morally wrong) but impractical for you overall. If it were practical you would accept slavery. To you, in either case, it is not 'wrong' in any moral sense. The problem (for you) is that, from a purely practical pov, some VERY good arguments can be made to show it hugely benefits society and therefore you.
Abraham Lincoln 'apparently' was a hardcore practicing bible-believing Christians. Its not what I 'want to think' but recorded history
@foxlake02 So you believe slavery is impractical (not morally wrong) but impractical for you overall. If it were practical you would accept slavery. To you, in either case, it is not 'wrong' in any moral sense. The problem (for you) is that, from a purely practical pov, some VERY good arguments can be made to show it hugely benefits society and therefore you.
Abraham Lincoln 'apparently' was a hardcore practicing bible-believing Christians. Its not what I 'want to think' but recorded history
@ElProximo Please cite your source for Lincoln professing his religion. All I ever read is that he held his beliefs private but is aid and bodyguard claimed he rejected the orthodox Christianity of his time. Also cite your source for God not approving of slavery. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. If you can't I'll assume you don't have any and kindly ask you to STFU.
@foxlake02 No. You read that his bodyguard mentioned Lincoln never spoke about his religion too often. You then read about how he was raised baptist, attended a presbyterian church became increasingly religious as president, routinely prayed and so on.
You don't get to 'tell anything' or 'instruct anything here'. You are intellectually dishonest and been caught and now you get to answer to me. Well you did answer - you believe slavery is only a practical matter. Ouch!
@ElProximo The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. - Abraham Lincoln
Since you have no citations, I'll assume you are just pulling what you want us to believe out of your ass. Thank God you are a Christian. Sounds like you would be a real asshole if it wasn't for that. How about rape and murder? Yah think you could make a good argument for that too if not for your religion?
@foxlake02 Stop pretending you are actually having a serious debate with me where you are in any position to be 'asking for citations'.
The Bible is not Abraham Lincolns book and Christianity was never his profession. Absolutely agreed. This is exactly something a dedicated Christian like Lincoln would say.
Why would you call rape and murder 'morally wrong'? The same reason you oppose slavery (at this time) because they are merely 'impractical' and don't benefit you (at this time)?
@ElProximo It will not do to investigate the subject of religion too closely, as it is apt to lead to infidelity. - Sorry, but that's your pal Abe again
So how much for the little girl? Send me a picture and maybe I make you a rich man.
@foxlake02 Don't apologize. That sounds like something he might say at some point in his life and doesn't change his lifelong history of church attendance, home bible readings, daily prayer.
Why do you want to buy a little girl? Is that what you're into? Buying kids?
@ElProximo I just thought since God gave instruction on how to buy and sell a man's daughter... well anyway, in case you change your mind and can't find any scripture against it.
My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them. - Abraham Lincoln OUCH!
@foxlake02 God gave instruction on how Israelites had to buy and sell into slavery. So you will first need to convert to Judaism. Then find yourself another tribe-member. Then you would probably want to know the slavery (in this case) is something like indentured servitude so don't get too excited before you find out what that means.
"..read his Bible diligently,..rely on God's promises .. a true Christian gentleman..he turned his heart to Christ"
@foxlake02 God gave instruction on how Israelites had to buy and sell into slavery. So you will first need to convert to Judaism. Then find yourself another tribe-member. Then you would probably want to know the slavery (in this case) is something like indentured servitude so don't get too excited before you find out what that means. Ultimate Citation. Lincolns wife:"..read his Bible diligently,..rely on God's promises .. a true Christian gentleman..he turned his heart to Christ"
@ElProximo ummm that wasn't a citation attributed to Lincoln but nice try. And I asked for citations AGAINST slavery. Not your interpretation of how people were commanded to enslave other people...
@foxlake02 Huh? The 'citation' is supposed to 'come from Lincoln'? No it isn't you moron. You don't even seem to know what citations are outside little PMSing teen boy ways to 'fighty boy' on YT comments lol
There isn't 'interpretations' on Israelite slavery. There are instructions. You quoted some of those instructions on HOW to have slaves. There were rules on how NOT to have slaves as well. What about it? Do you have some problem with it?
@ElProximo It doesn't pay to lie when we can just look back at my post. I said "citation attributed to Lincoln". If you are going to be that dishonest we are done. You made the assertion that Lincoln was a Christian. Now show the evidence or STFU.
@ElProximo Oh yeah, his wife said he was. Even though he said, "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them", but you keep on believing. Just ignore that one if it doesn't fit your fairy tale.
Rape and Murder are impractical for any society. History shows that all human societies whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other religion, none condone it as a matter of common sense. Even piranha do not eat there own in a feeding frenzy. They are not Christian piranha, it's just that they would not survive as a species if they did.
So you could accept rape and murder if and when it were providing practical benefits to society as a whole?
Rape and murder were entirely practical in some societies at certain times. Vikings flourished and grew in wealth, power, improving living conditions, health and safety and nearly every aspect of a society directly from rape and murder.
So those rapes and murders were 'right' according to your standards.
@ElProximo ummmm the Vikings are gone. Replaced by people who were better at living together. Do I have to draw you a picture? It is better as individuals and as a group if we can all just get along. You don't need fables from goat herders to figure that one out. Nice dodge but you still owe me a few citations. Lincoln was an historical figure. You didn't know him personally any more than I did so it's all you have to make your case.
@foxlake02 The Vikings were replaced by people who were better at living together? No, they stayed exactly where they were and became Christians. They embraced Christianity and accepted that rape and murder were morally wrong regardless of the practical benefits to their society.
But why are you 'ummming' about the Vikings. The point was made that you only oppose rape and murder when they are impractical. Right?
@ElProximo I oppose rape and murder because as a practical matter it is wrong. Why do other religions oppose it then? The Vikings as a social unit are no more. Yes many people are ancestors of them just as we have ancestors to American Indians. European nations are much less Christian statistically than in the US. Especially the Scandinavian countries. hmmm, them damn Nordic backsliders!
@foxlake02 You wouldn't have any problem with the Norwegians raping and murdering again IF they could show it benefits them again. What if a majority of us decide that its practical to have you raped and killed? I mean you wouldn't like the feeling but you would certainly have to agree it was 'right' (at that time).
@ElProximo Again there is absolutely no circumstances where it is justified. Our Constitution not only allows for rule by consensus but also protects the rights of the minority. Try reading what I post. Not what you can warp my words into. You are starting to get tedious.
@ElProximo My point is that I can see absolutely no circumstances in the real world where rape, murder, or SLAVERY could ever be justified. If you think that it was of for some people to enslave other people because God said to do it then I have to believe you are a fool. I also think we as a society should not be torturing our prisoners but it seems the Christian right in the US think it's okay. Point being, Christians do not have a monopoly on what is good for humanity and what is not.
@foxlake02 You think slavery is wrong because of the Christian culture you grew up in. Otherwise, you could easily see many circumstances where slavery would most definitely have practical benefits. You also believe 'waterboarding' to save 100's of innocent lives is the correct moral choice. Let's get real here. This all comes down to you hating the USA. Which is (in your heart) your 'parents'. You hate God (parents) and you just want to argue and fight to hurt and ruin it. Yes?
@ElProximo I am a product of my culture just as you are. If we lived in the south 200 years ago maybe we would be arguing about why it's okay to own slaves. That would be to your advantage. Then you could actually cite scripture to back up your claim. It doesn't look like you can find any against it so far. hehehehe
@foxlake02 No. 200 years ago you would be likely be opposed to slavery since almost nobody in your western culture was 'for' such a thing. I would very likely be part of an 'abolitionist church movement' and reminding people that 'There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus' and recalling how the Church banned slavery as soon as it could do so in Rome. If we lived 200 years ago. (actually I'd be in Norway farming more likely).
@ElProximo Mr. Lincoln's maxim and philosophy were: 'What is to be, will be, and no prayers of ours can arrest the decree. He never joined any Church. He was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian. - Mary Todd Lincoln...just can't make up her mind can she?
The abolitionist movement was in the northern states 200 years ago. I said had we lived in the south with southern Christian culture.
@ElProximo Mr. Lincoln's maxim and philosophy were: 'What is to be, will be, and no prayers of ours can arrest the decree. He never joined any Church. He was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian. - Mary Todd Lincoln...just can't make up he mind can she?
The abolitionist movement was in the northern states 200 years ago. I said had we lived in the south with southern Christian culture.
@ElProximo He never joined any Church. He was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian. - Mary Todd Lincoln...just can't make up he mind can she?
The abolitionist movement was in the northern states 200 years ago. I said had we lived in the south with southern Christian culture.
@foxlake02 If you lived in the South in a Christian culture 200 years ago you would probably be a slave and happy to learn that the overwhelming majority of Christians would easily defeat any Christian justifications for slavery.
But hey.. none of this is 'wrong or right' to you so don't worry about it.
@ElProximo Again, there is no circumstance where slavery is justified. I can not see any place that is would be an advantage in human culture. Not even 4000 years ago by Jewish tribes.
@ElProximo So I hate my country and my parents and God too hey? Well thanks for telling me what I think. It's pretentious ass clowns like you that give your religion a bad name. You don't know me from Adam and you have no idea how much I love my country or my parents. I can't really hate your version of a sky daddy if I don't believe in him either.
@foxlake02 Sure and you don't deny any of it. That's what this all about after all. How much you just hate God and you hate anything in the USA that represents God or even reminds you of Jesus Christ or any thoughts you will one day meet your Maker.
@ElProximo My parents are not religious people. I actually agree with my father's outlook on religion. Fuck you for suggesting that I hate him. The secret prisons our country has been involved in torturing prisoners will only make individual citizens feel justified doing it to their enemies or even their children. It degrades us all as a society.
Oh and fuck you for thinking I hate my country too you pompous ass.
@foxlake02 Here is the question we might need to start looking at: Is it time to separate you from the USA into your own nation. You can call it 'New Sodom' or whatever you want. It might even be a current State. Then separated. Would you consider that?
@ElProximo Why is it time for me to separate myself from my country? Because you say so? I'll consider trying to make my country a better place by handing people like you your ass when you come up with this kind of stupidity. Trying to justify your dogma by rewriting history and accusing those who disagree with you of hatred. All the time using religion to justify torture and ignorance. There are quite a few of countries where religion is the government. Look how good they are doing.
@foxlake02 Drop it already. We know you were caught here manipulating history (very pathetic atheist website revisionism) and we know you are doing it for propaganda purposes but lets stop there. At this point I don't want you in our society. You hate Christianity in your society. So now its time to discuss separation. (I didn't say expulsion or smashing your face in). I'm asking if you will consider voluntarily separating and having your own independent atheist nation? If no - why not?
@ElProximo Actually, I was looking over quite a few different sites to refresh what I have known for years about Lincoln and about slavery. Why not? Because I love my country. My parents and children and friends live here. I appreciate the Constitution and that includes the principle of a wall of separation between church and state. If you want to live in a country with a Christian run government then you leave. Don't let the door hit you (or that mouse in your pocket) on the way out.
@foxlake02 I definitely would love to live in a Christian-run government. I (mostly) do now. They protect the separation of Church and State concept Christians invented and invited and love. You don't want to live in a separate independent 'atheist' country because you know it would go to hell quickly. You are the weakest kind of person (in the worst way) in that you love living in your parents (Christianity) house but want to squeal hate at your parents for how lame they are lol
@ElProximo Still telling me what I think hey? Keep being an ass clown. You're fun to laugh at. Most right wing fundamentalists in this country will not even admit that there is a separation of church and state. They want to pretend the First Amendment doesn't even mean what it says. You do know that many of the signers of the Constitution were not Christian right? Guess you had better rewrite that history too. While you are at it rewrite the history of life on earth too.
@foxlake02 Christians invented separation of church and state. It's what came about when Christians (which is nearly every single Signer) get together. What's fascinating about you is how you read an atheist website and some very very bad revisionism. You accept that as 'Gospel truth of history' and now go about amazed and offended anyone is trying to 'rewrite it' lol. Wow.. you are an easy dupe! Let's hope you never get invited to take a free Scientology exam.
@ElProximo I did not go to a single "atheist website for my understanding of how the framers of the Constitution felt about religion. It's common knowledge many were not Christian. Thanks for admitting the Tea Party doesn't know what they are talking about.
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason - Benjamin Franklin
I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature - Thomas Jefferson
Still waiting for your citation for God condemning slavery. Can't?
@foxlake02 Of course you got that from some idiotic atheist website and you are so goofy you think you can select out some quote and ohhh... wow... that PROVES they were all atheists! You got me!
Two. 2. Two people is all you could find? One is a hardcore Christian Deist and the other 'might' be called a Christian Deist.
So you have 2 people who were Christian Deists and will you now admit that nearly EVERY single signer was a Christian? I think you just did. Nice self-ownage idiot.
@ElProximo If that is true then you must admit that Hitler was a "hardcore Christian Deist" too. LOL I'd say they were all politicians. You cherry pick whatever you want but the fact is Jefferson was afraid of how religion would screw up government. That's why he worked hard for a "wall of separation". Also Article Five says there will be no religious test to hold any office. It is a secular government. Stop pretending it's not.
@foxlake02 Jefferson wrote a diest bible ffs. This isn't a mystery. He pretty much goes on and on about Christianity and how much he likes Jesus principles. You are talking about separation of church and state (the principles) AS IF that argues against Christians or Christianity. No it does not. Christians (especially in this situation) were crazy for the idea (since many were persecuted by 'officially Anglican/Catholic etc governments). Christians teach you this. You aren't revealing it.
@ElProximo Is that the best you can do? Jefferson was a deist that liked Jesus principles? Nothing you said makes our government any less secular. I have a right to not believe your religion just like Jefferson. I like some things in the Bible too but I think fundamentalist dogma is silly. The first and sixth amendment protects both sides that way. That's why Ben Stein is an idiot trying to get religious dogma taught as science in our schools.
@foxlake02 I don't need to do anything more than point out two (and possibly three) of the 'founding fathers' were Christian Deists. This is debatable since some say Franklin was far more orthodox than he might have appeared (or later in life). So what you need to do is admit your mistake.
There is a second problem. Despite REPEATEDLY EXPLAINING THIS TO YOU you keep pretending to argue with a 'Christian Theocracy Proponent' and YOU ARE NOT. So what is wrong with you? Are you retarded?
@ElProximo Seriously pal. You have to warp a lot of word meanings and a lot of history to call this a Christian run government. Look up the word secular and tell me why is is not a good description of our government. Look up the word deist and tell me how being one makes a person a Christian. Simply declaring that your interpretation of dogma is right and the rest are not "true" believers is as old as human history.
@foxlake02 There isn't any 'warping' to be done. Almost ALL of your USA reps are Christians. It isn't near the 99% levels at the beginning but yes you most definitely have sizable % of Christians running the USA right now. It is a secular government. why are you pretending this is some kind of claim you are fighting for? The word 'Christian Deist' may well have various meanings but here is what we do know: It DOES NOT MEAN ATHEIST. derp
@ElProximo Really man, it's like you are calling people demons or something terrible with horns and a pitch fork or something. An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in a God or Gods. I never told you how I believe except to say I reject your silly version of God. It's pretty clear that Jefferson and Franklin didn't think much of the religious crap of their day either.
@foxlake02 Jefferson and Franklin thought a lot about religion. If you looked them up on wiki you could find entire chapters covering their (often complicated, sometimes simple) Christian views. Others are not only devoted Christians (or many a denomination) but even Pastors and Clergy. "You do know that many of the signers of the Constitution were not Christian right?" 2 = many? They produced separation of Church and State. You didn't. Atheists didn't. You should thank those Christians.
@ElProximo Most historians count George Washington as deist but not particularly Christian too. My point is that this is not a Christian run government. There is no religious test to be in government. Proclaiming Christianity does not make you one. Hitler claimed to be Christian too. Do you think he was?
@foxlake02 Most of your representatives are Christians including your President. I certainly do agree nobody knows the hearts or who is a 'said christian' or who is hardcore. This is also true for people like Franklin who might have 'talked the deist talk' but was really far more orthodox than he came across. My point is that when Christian have nearly total control of government they make..... a secular government with separation of church and state. maybe this does need to change??
@ElProximo This is another point you seem to disagree with the Tea Party wingnuts. They think Obama is a secret Muslim born in Kenya that hates America and white people. LOL
I have no problem with people who have a particular faith in office so long as they can separate their dogma from their duties. I actually think our president is doing this very well.
@foxlake02 Jefferson and Franklin thought a lot about religion. If you looked them up on wiki you could find entire chapters covering their (often complicated, sometimes simple) Christian views. Others are not only devoted Christians (or many a denomination) but even Pastors and Clergy. "You do know that many of the signers of the Constitution were not Christian right?" 2? They produced separation of Church and State. You didn't. Atheists didn't. You should thank those Christians.
Darwin's theory(and it is only a theory it has never been proved), adopted by the Germans under Hitler led to the demise of more than 50 million people during world war 2 and hundreds of thosands more in the preceding years, mentally and physically handicapped people (useless mouths so called by the Germans).
It is not generally known that Darwin was confined in a lunatic asylum for a considerable period of time,it has been "airbrushed from history".
Hitler continued Darwin’s idea. Darwin believed in the survival of the fittest all of these theories began with him
After Darwin people like Frances Galton using Darwin’s theory came up with EUGENICS look it up if you don’t know what it is because the media doesn’t like atheists to know what Darwin and others who don’t believe in God really want to do to this world. We are not God and we can’t act like God it is much worse for humanity
Ok guys, looky here. You christians out there looking for anything to make atheists look bad find Hitler, who was very Catholic and justified his actions by claiming-"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator." Now, darwin only helped explain the diversity of life on earth. He did not intend that his theory be misrepresented and twisted into "social darwinism" in where we apply the harsh, flawed rules of the animal kingdom to mankind. We can think rationally.
Lmfao what does this have to do with evolution? It's Ironic that Nazi style propaganda would compare Nazi's to The theory of Evolution with a Zionist Jew for Jesus hosting it. What's even funnier is that though controversial Hitler had some very good ideas.
As stupid as Ben Stein is, he unintentionally makes a good point here. Society shouldn't be keeping the weak alive. It only drags down the overall species.
We should take all the semen from the blond people and put in in the Negros in Africa they don't care anyway. they run around like animals and shit. peacefully.
And I love the quote you used by that Fyodor Dostoevsky fellow "If God does not exist, everything is permitted!" So then since the Nazis were permitted to do such horrible acts, that should suggest then that God does not exist correct? For if God did exist he wouldn't permit them to do those things! But they did!!! Ha
Hitler and all the Nazis believed in God in fact. I'll concede that they weren't true, loving Christians, but who are you to question someone else's faith? So you're suggesting that an evolutionist can't be a Christian? That's fucking absurd. You really don't know what you're talking about, and it looks like most people here can see that.
@SteinUndStahl666 Christianty only has to do with CHRIST. Christ's teachings - THAT'S IT. If you believe in the morals of Christ, such as love your neighbor, do unto others as they would do unto you, then you may call yourself a Christian.
Yeah, but everything we know about Jesus comes from the Bible. So if you believe in Jesus, that means you trust the Bible. So if you trust the BIble, shouldn't you believe everything in it? I never understood these so-called Christians who say the Bible is God's word, but then they decided they don't believe everything in it.
Cant u read English or are u ppl so ignorant to truth what?? it`s obvious hitler embraced the darvinism and use it for probaganda to right the killing of other races.
If Atheism is so dangerous, how come the countries with the highest amount of Atheists such as Sweden, Estonia, the Czech Republic, and Iceland are some of the happiest and safest places in the world?
And yes, Hitler was most likely not a Christian. However, the majority of his followers were.
@SteinUndStahl666 the day all those counties involve themselves wid american politics especially against *athesit communist* china & influencing world events I'll ask this question to u :) until then just knw being willingly immoral [which these countries may not be] doesnt mean they are peaceful.
There are plenty of countries that aren't involved in influencing world events like America does, and they don't have the high standard of living that those Atheistic countries have.
Whose talking about being immoral? Secular countries actually have a far lower crime rate, and a far higher amount of civil liberties, than religious countries do.
@SteinUndStahl666 define crime ... in a ISlamic place were sex does happen & no ppl dont get flogged it's considered a immoral thing but in ur place no 1 wud give a damn b/c its normal. ur culture has a different outlook on crime & social immorality which is y u feel ur better. the same thing in reliigous countires. they feel their values INFLUENCED by reliigon is better but thnx to economic poverty & corrupt/oppressive regimes supported or atleast held in high esteem by USA u have chaos.
There are plenty of countries that aren't involved in influencing world events like America does name a few except germany & ST korea
i think it's high time u watch wats goin around in the world rathering simply believing BECAUSE they are athestic socities u enjoy ur life. economic prosperity leads to better lifestyles not views on religion. [agonostic or athestic or religion]
ps. Secularism is not the opposite of religion atheism is.so dont mist ur religious views wid politics :)
It's not about religion its the fact that you are all "useless eaters" in the words of Henry Kissinger and they want the world population to be 500 million. Its fuckin written in stone in 8 different languages on the highest hilltop in Georgia. Hitler was an occultist not a fucking christian, the swastika is a sun wheel it comes from Tibetan mysticism. haha everyones so blind where do you think all the Nazi scientists went after WWII america took em in.
The most ironic thing for Christians who try to compare Evolution with Nazism is that Nazis BURNED Darwin's books in the rallies, and actually used Martin Luther's book "The Jews and their Lies", as a roadmap for what they did to the Jews. The Nazi movement was overwealmingly Christian, with the same suspicions held against non-Christians that American Evangelicals have today. I challenge Christians to read Martin Luther's book on the Jews and say that the Nazis didn't follow it to the letter.
In all fairness, Nazism was based heavily on Social Darwinism, and Hitler was a big believer in evolution. Yes, they burnt Darwin's books for propaganda reasons, but Hitler also writes about evolution and its importance in breeding a new man in both Mein Kampf and his second book.
What is hypocritical is that Christians point out Hitler's Darwinism, but never acknowledge that the vast majority of his followers were Christian.
it doesn't matter if someone is religious or not, once a human understands that there is no divine hand to stop them from conquering the world, they will stop at nothing except a collective group with more force to prevent them from doing a campaign that is not within their interests
This is interesting, because Ben Stein is Jewish, and most Jews today believe in evolution and are socially liberal, whereas he is the exact opposite. The quotes from Hitler and also what the lady said really hit the nail on the head. Skeptics always use quotes from "Mein Kampf" such as "a fox will always remain a fox,...", etc., when they are missing the point. Evolution says that all living things need to compete to survive. Well, doesn't that apply to humans, too, and Hitler's views???
What a joke this video is... Ben Stein and his fellow ashkeNAZI Jews have been practicing eugenics for hundreds of years. This is why they have much higher IQs than everyone else. Jews want you to always look somewhere else, rather than look at them. Jews in the media started the 'Obama being a muslim thing', so you won't realize he is a Jew puppet... And for the record you can't choose to be an atheist, it's just what i am...
Using Hitler as a "follower" of evolution is low and disgusting. The link if any is meaningless because the evidence for evolution stands on its own. Further, Hitler was a teetotaler, a vegitarian etc. Should we condemn those people because of a link with Hitler? Start drinking and eat meat because Hitler didn't. Should we condemn those who paint landscapes or men with moustaches? These are lame attacks.
..it's sad to say; but, that's essentially the case. I've debated Catholics endlessly over the last 20 years and you'd be dumbfounded at the lack of knowledge they have of scripture or the outright blasphemous things they think are in scripture and are not. I quoted Christ to a Catholic apologist once with out giving attribution. He flamed back at me and said what I was saying was blasphemy.
When I gave him the citation, the earth nearly flipped poles. He denies he said it now.
Well yes indeed, I've seen a fair bit of that too, though generally I've found Islam to be far worse. It has been a long time since I've studied the bible myself- but then that doesn't bother me. It's the book of myths that happened to be popular in my culture when I was born there, but not much more than that. There are plenty of good bits, and the NT redeems it a lot, but there's also plenty of evil and nonsense.
@Ozzyman200 You'd have to point out where the evil and nonsense is. Much of what people mistake for Christian ills end up being the ills of pseudo christian cults that Christians get blamed for. I won't say christians haven't screwed the pooch now and then; but, largely they police their own. They were warning about Jim Jones long before the press or the law enforcement got involved, then it turned out Jones was CIA and his people were murdered. Koolaid is the popular fiction.
There is a great deal of evil nonsense, mostly in the OT. Talking snakes, zombies, pillars of salt, the wandering Jew, the Earth having corners etc. There is also plenty of evil- drowning the whole world, rape, pillage, genocide all over.
Christians have a pretty poor record of policing their own I'm afraid. There are so many infighting factions, we can look back on most actions and find someone who condemned it though. Sorry, I don't know Jim Jones.
@Ozzyman200 "There is a great deal of evil nonsense, mostly in the OT. Talking snakes, zombies, pillars of salt, the wandering Jew, the Earth having corners etc. There is also plenty of evil- drowning the whole world, rape, pillage, genocide all over."
Taken out of context it may seem so. But in context, not so much. I'd have to check on talking snakes.. can't say I remember that one. Certainly no zombies in the scriptures. But, yeah, God saw the earth full of evil and man corrupted...
It's not taken out of context. It seems you have a filter that allows you to interpret what you read as good regardless of the body count. The talking snake was in the garden of Eden. The Jewish zombies, including Jesus, rose when he did apparently.
@Ozzyman200 .. but the story of the flood isn't about evil, it's about genetics. Genesis 6 states that the line of men was corrupted and God killed everyone save for 8 uncorrputed peopjle to end the genetic tampering. That is in the text.
As to policing their own.. not really. Christians have attempted endlessly to police their own but usually find themselves up against persecution and folks like you who won't listen when others warn them that, "hey, that's a cult, not a christian group."
I'm not aware of genetic tampering, but then it's been a while since I read it. Even if that's the case though, to my mind, genocide is still a bad thing. Even if god was really really angry, he shouldn't just kill everyone. There are other better ways. You really can't condemn Hitler for what he did. He was following god's example. If the genes were the problem, god could have just stopped them breeding- problem solved.
@Ozzyman200 ..I know that Dr. Walter Martin and his peers, for instance, were way ahead of the curve on Jim Jones and no one listened to them. Later, the same folks that wouldn't listen were the first to point the finger at Christians out of ignorance. That's just the way it is. People don't bother finding out the truth before pointing fingers and to the extent they're warned, they don't listen. Same was so with Hitler. Who listened to Churchill until it was too late?
Perhaps that's the case, but personally I'm against all cults, including religions. That's not to say they're all quite the same. Christianity is now going through a relatively peaceful period, mainly redeemed by a recent focus on the peaceful messages of the NT. Christianity is certainly bigger and older than scientology, but how can you say one is a cult, and not the other? 2000 years ago christianity was not unlike cults we see now.
Rather less than what you claim, but I have no evidence of that beyond your word. I have been a scientist for about the same time. I value science, with its basis in reality, i.e. evidence and objectivity rather more. Also note than generally those who study religion more, especially comparative religion tend to be atheists. You are something of an anomaly there though there's nothing wrong with that of course.
Good to get a civil debate here btw, so thank you for that.
Yes, I admit to being something of an anomaly, and I know it throws some people. But, Dr. Walter Martin was really the founder of the field amongst those studying the christian cults primarily and that's largely the basis of my study.
And there is no reason that debate needs to be uncivil. I can be uncivil when it's called for. I tend to be frank and to the point anyway; but, only because I think that being direct and being honest are requirements, not electives.
Unless you're a christian and a minister, it's unlikely you would know him. That or you'd have to be involved in the same field or something. The guy founded the field in the modern day and wrote texts that are essential to any minister's library where understanding cults is concerned. He wasn't infallible; but, he provided serious and quite accurate work that clarifies the situation quite well. Primary work is called "Kingdom of the cults." And this isn't the only place debates degen fast
At 5 minutes into the video - hitler removed religion from school carriculum and tried removing God from society. Apparently you don't bother to even fact check when facts are right under your noses.
@Ozzyman200 More propaganda. Hitler was a pagan. He and his SS were into the occult. They fawned over Catholicism and cut deals with the Catholic church because Hitler saw himself largely as finishing what the Catholic church had started - the destruction of jews. Guys like you either don't care about the facts or have never bothered studying them.
I've got over 20 years in comparative religion studies centering on Catholicism as a major area. Hitler wasn't a christian or a catholic.
Ignore propaganda. If you actually look at the evidence of his words and actions yourself Hitler was very Chrisian. What they did was based on the Bible.
The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. i, ch. xi For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. - Adolf Hitler, creationist, Mein Kampf, vol. ii, ch. x
@Ozzyman200 No, hitler was a politician establishing a firm beach-head of support so that he could get away with what he had planned. One can't look at the history of what Hitler was and what he did and conclude that he was a christian. One has to ignore everything except for the most superficial and naive of records.
Jim Jones similarly referenced the will of God. Jones too was a cult leader, not a christian. He was also a CIA asset. What God were either referencing?...
Yes indeed, he was a politician, no one knows for sure what he thought. He said a lot to gain support indeed. However both his words and actions strongly suggest he was Christian. He was able to back up what he did with the bible. You cannot see his actions and conclude he wasn't Christian.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with Jim Jones. There are a lot of divisions even amongst Christians. Yes, it's odd they can't agree.
@Ozzyman200 No, his words and actions suggest no such thing, unless christianity had never been defined by the Apostles. This is the same crap logic I run into daily with cultists. Some believe they're going to be gods and claim to be christian. Again, fine if Judeochristian roots hadn't been monotheistic from the start and excluding any possibilitiy of any other god ever existing. Christianity isn't a club that you join. It has specific beliefs that must be adhered to.
You're just not looking at the facts. You're commiting the not a true scotsman fallacy. You need to look at his actions, not just what he paid lipservice to, although his actions matched his words in most cases. How is Christianity not a cult? You have your version of Christianity, he had his, why is yours better than his? Look at his actions. Do some research for yourself. You are entitled to your opinions, but they need to match the facts.
Actually, I have looked quite extensively at the facts over time. And looking at his actions is what I did. You're echoing me apparently in hopes of confusing the record. So, I'd simply point people in the direction of the literature and say go look.
Next, Version of christianity. No. The New testament wasn't released in multiple flavors. And when you diverge from the normative definition, you're into the cult aspect - pseudo-christian rather than christian.
No, really, you need to look into this yourself. You keep claiming that I haven't, as though you're going to fool anyone. You're not.
He had one version of Christianity, you have yours, his is just different from yours, that's all.
"The New testament wasn't released in multiple flavors."
Yes it was, there are many translations, many versions. Not only that, but various sects of Christianity have their own versions and other holy books beyond the NT.
No, sorry. Christianity is very specifically defined. It's why we have language and rules of language. What you're saying is that he can have a car if he says he's a licensed driver and is riding a unicycle which he calls a car. No. that devolves language and meaning.
He didn't have his version and someone else theirs. That's why the cults were defined amongst christians, to point out those whe were merely using christianity toward another agenda - hiding behind it rather than being..
I do agree with your first paragraph, but the bible is enormously open to interpretation. Else why are there so many different denominations that can't agree with each other? Aren't they all reading from the same book. The WBC is able to back up everything they do with bible quotes. You can't fault them on that. The same with Hitler. The problem seems to be the contradictions in the bible. I do appreciate the NT is much more about lvoe than the OT of course.
Not really. The Bible contains parables. That I will grant you; but, they're understood two ways - one by christians and another by unbelievers. The way they're understood by unbelievers is expected. They were considered wartime messages and functioned as such. Most of them are metaphors that are understood by actual christians. But the metaphors are code to mislead those who aren't in on the plot. They were intended to mask the purpose of christs ministry - which was to die for salvation
"Most of them are metaphors that are understood by actual christians. But the metaphors are code to mislead those who aren't in on the plot."
Now that's pretty unlikely. The problem is there are 100s of Christian groups each one claiming that only they have the correct interpretation and all the others aren't true christians. And it's the same with every other holy book. Surely if they were actually written by gods they'd be clear.
@Ozzyman200 Actually, it's exactly what was going on. Christ told the apostles and it's recorded in at least 3 of the gospels that he would deliver the mystery of salvation to the crowds in parables only and relate it directly to them in private because it was not given to them to know. This, as it happens, was a fulfillment of prophecy that this would be the case. Do you know anything at all about Christianity or is it just another religion to you? Curious.
None of us know what Christ said of course, beyond the character in the book, nor even if he existed.
I know a great deal about Christianity, having been raised as a Christian, going through Christian schools most of my life. Mainly Methodist and CofE, so fairly liberal though. I excelled in scripture. Generally those who studied religion and did well are atheists because it tends to fall apart on examination.
..to that extent, it's really easy to tell who understands them and is on the reservation and who doesn't and is therefore off the reservation. Otherwise, the language is quite accurate and simply doesn't allow for the vast interpretation you would have me believe it does. I know better. The text was written in a language specifically intended to avoid confusion. Greek. If you know the rules of greek established under Alexander's direction, misunderstanding it takes work.
If what you say is true, then why are theists so divided? Why do people talk to god and read his various books and all get such different messages? It's just like the emporer's new clothes- people see something different, a few see nothing.
The huge problem with priests, theists generally, doing studies like theology is the enormous bias they have from the start. Almost all theologists have such a bias which hugely compromises theology.
@Ozzyman200 The key word is theists. Unbelievers aren't supposed to get it. Most who claim christianity aren't christians. They rather are followers of this philosophy or that. Christ warned you can't serve two masters. And this is what they attempt to do without thinking anything about it. They follow a philosopher and will burn the Bible to defend the philoosphyl.
And you're correct about theological bias. There are far more out there looking for a paycheck rather than truth.
That's really no different from the Emporer's new clothes. Only those who believe in the clothes are able to see them and fully understand them. I dare say people who can see the clothes and have spent decades studying the cut of the jacket have become experts, but they still miss the true understanding.
One way to tell is this- do those who agree he has clothes agree on anything about them, or are they many contradictory versions?
@Ozzyman200 Actually, yes it is. Because it isn't a matter of mere faith. Again, it's more akin to sending out a coded message in wartime. Allies are supposed to understand the code and arrive at normandy while the enemy doesn't get it and winds up at Calais. The interesting thing is that Christ used metaphors that had been employed prior in the scriptures so that anyone who understood the scriptures would have the ability to figure it out. But, most often, those metaphors are lost on them.
But how do you know that your code is correct? How do you know someone else's isn't? Preachers preach the Garden of Eden myth in church for example. Some christians take it as literal truth, some say metaphor. There are so many different interpretations, each group claiming theirs is the only true one. The same goes for most holy books.
@Ozzyman200 It generally just takes study. And that's something most people don't do in a day or a week. Most passive readers latch onto something that may sound odd and never look again. People grab a sentence out of context and turn it into something it never was. I can't do a full defense of position in this space; but, that said, it isn't that difficult to get to the truth if one is actually intereseted in what the truth is. And egos have to be moved out of the way.
Hi, strangely that comment didn't come up in my box. Quite odd.
Your response is just what others with different interpretations, such as Hitler, WBC, The Pope etc, would say about theirs too. How can you be sure you're being objective and everyone else is wrong? If it isn't difficult, then why is it so incredibly rare that two theists, let alone christians, will agree with each other on even the basics such as the nature of god, or the main messages of the bible?
@Ozzyman200 Yeah, it's what most of the cults try to hide behind and I'm aware of that; but, the language, again, is not so loose as to escape examination. People look crosseyed at words when it comes to religion more than if they were reading any other book. And it's nuts. The bible uses all the normative forms of language with all the same grammer; so, it's really not difficult language wise to get to the meaning. Problem is, most want you to filter it through them.
@Ozzyman200 Hitler publically payed lipservice to the Catholic church in order to score political points in public. Privately he was deep into the occult. This is not a matter of opinion. And the two worlds are mutually exclusive. So there is literally no way to paint the man as a christian other than from utter ignorance of the term or the facts.
@tate22000 LIar. I read "Mein Kampf" in german, there's no mention of evolution whatsoever. But God is mentioned all the time. Hitler banned all books by Darwin and Haeckel related to Evolutionary Theory. He used specific creationist arguments against interracial marriage.
@leungchaan Don't take my word for it: "The German Führer. . . has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution." (Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics, p.230. This man is an evolutionary anthropologist.)
@TomDavid88 Oh, yes, he was. The blacklist was published in "die Bücherei", the nazi-regime's official magazine for lending-libraries. And they didn't ban just a few books, they dedicated a whole paragraph to "primitive darwinism" (sic), which included all works by Darwin and Haeckel plus all works by other authors related to darwinism. That's recorded history, mate. And yes, Hitler mentions "Gott" quite a few times in "mein Kampf", not just "Vorsehung". I can post some quotes, if you insist.
@leungchaan I'm honestly interested in seeing your evidence that they "banned" Darwin. I have never heard of this and highly doubt it.
Also, as far as I can remember, Hitler mentions "Providence" and speaks of the "Eternal Creator" but never mentions any belief in "God." Hitler's "Table Talk" I've found to be the best insite into his mind. But, post some quotes where he mentions his belief in "Gott" if you have any.
This has been flagged as spam show
During the "Monkey Trial" in Dayton OH in 1925, among the strongest supporters of William Jennings Bryant were the KKK. Religious fanatics, like the Taliban, Al Qaeda & Turkish clerics, are solidly anti-evolution. Just saying...
prschuster 1 month ago
actually this sort of makes sense I mean perhaps he wanted to wipe out religion starting with Judiasm.....idk....
cuterocker98 3 months ago 2
You're wasting your time trying to disprove the obvious Darwinism and Hitler, there are thousands of people who have their minds set on believing he was indeed a Chrisitan (Hitchens' sheep) and any evidence you can present is pointless. I made a similar video, and sometimes feel like I'm talking with religious fanatics when trying to reason with them.
theantisauronist 4 months ago
Hitler was a cult leader who pushed the idea that humans of one particular region were arbitrarily superior to all others. He wanted people to believe in him and his message. That made any other beliefs his enemies including Christianity, Judaism, Islam, and yes, even the belief in nothing as those people did not believe in him.
Christians should be acutely aware of Hitler's false use of Darwinism to justify his horrors. The Bible has been so used numerous times in the past for the same thing
putzthewondersloth 4 months ago
The dishonesty and stupidity of creationists is truly amusing.
ekorre33 5 months ago
5 estars *****
bnejaforever 5 months ago
People like Hitler and the social dawrinists will use--or rather misuse--anything they can to forward their agenda. Just as the Bible has been misused to justify slavery, and the inquisition.
This video is as ignorant as using the Klan and the Inquisitions to argue against Christianity. Ben Stein and David Berlinski are such buffoons.
UtubeIsRunByScum 8 months ago
@UtubeIsRunByScum How is the Bible misused to to justify slavery? It clearly condones slavery as part of the social constructs of the day. It even documents what God commanded as to how masters are to treat there slaves. It also tells soldiers when it is permitted to take sex slaves from conquered tribes.
foxlake02 7 months ago 13
@foxlake02 I'm sure that the creationists who attack Darwin will have some response to that. The point is, they will argue that the Bible does not justify slavery. I was conceding the point to them in order to make my own point, about misuse of a principle.
UtubeIsRunByScum 7 months ago
@UtubeIsRunByScum I'll agree any politician including Hitler will misinterpret anything at his disposal to persuade gullible people but I really don't think you even have to misinterpret the Bible to justify slavery. It spells out how to go about enslaving and keeping slaves. Most modern fundamentalists ignore parts of the Bible like that but take the creation story literally.
foxlake02 7 months ago
@foxlake02 They do not ignore it. But you are ignorant. The words you speak of were for Israelites in ancient Israel. Jews. I don't know what you think 'Fundmentalist' means but all Christians today (and everyone else) certainly believes the Israelites were most definitely 'literally' instructed to do this.
Are you so stupid that you actually think its some kind of 'instruction' for Christians and they must somehow be 'ignoring it'? Wow you are fantastically ignorant of the Bible wow.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Thanks for admitting the Bible has accounts of God commanding a particular group of people to enslave other groups of people. And yes, I know Christians who have never read the particular verses that show God instructing people to enslave other people and even instructions on how to beat your slaves. watch?v=yQFI66E12sU
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 You need to admit you were wrong. Christians (who study their bible) know the Israelites had all kinds of rules and laws and instructions for various military campaigns.
What happened here is that you were mistaken. You mistakenly believed that this was some kind of instruction for mankind. But you saw Christians abolished slavery and don't do it. So, you actually decided "Hmm they must not know what I know" LOL
Anyways, you got schooled and can't admit it? Lame.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Actually Christians used the Bible to justify slavery until the civil war. I think I know how people in my own experience have responded to verses like Leviticus 25:44-46 or Exodus 21:7-11. They simply did not know about them. It is ignored in their churches. Christians in any society will interpret their dogma to fit their sensibilities. It's nothing new. You can call me a liar and rewrite history all you want but it is your FAIL.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 But you were just caught lying about history. You just wrote: "Christians used the Bible to justify slavery until the civil war'.
In real history we know Christians abolish slavery as soon as they dominate Rome. Slavery becomes unheard of for most of western civlization until we get to an aberration - a handful of Europeans jump in on it and are promptly crushed by the Christian Abolitionists who fight and die to eliminate it (even worldwide).
But why do u think slavery is wrong?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@foxlake02 But you were just caught lying about history. You just wrote: "Christians used the Bible to justify slavery until the civil war'.
In real history we know Christians abolish slavery as soon as they dominate Rome. Slavery becomes unheard of for most of western civlization until we get to an aberration - a handful of Europeans jump in on it and are promptly crushed by the Christian Abolitionists who fight and die to eliminate it (even worldwide).
But why do u think slavery is wrong?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Slaveholders justified the practice by citing the Bible. That is not a lie it is an historical fact. They asked who could question the Word of God when it said, "slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling" - Ephesians 6:5, or "tell slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect"- Titus 2:9. Both the Union and the Confederacy invoked the Bible to justify their positions on slavery so how have I lied?
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Right and serial killers have tried to justify their actions and been rejected for it. You have, at best an aberration. Among that aberration (modern slavery in Christendom) you have a handful who actually tried to find bible verses to justify it. They were promptly and easily SMASHED by Christians who overwhelmingly won all hearts, minds and then died defeating them.
So what did you mean by 'Christians' you liar lol
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Lincoln never joined a church nor ever made a clear profession of Christian belief but he recognized as a practical matter, that we could not proclaim that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights...and continue this practice. Are you saying that God condemns slavery? I have never seen it in the Bible. I only hear contorted interpretations when social constructs deemed it necessary.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 I'm asking you why you are talking to me (and others) as if we understand slavery is something bad or something to be ashamed of?
You talk like slavery incriminates the bible. Why would you believe slavery was somehow 'morally wrong'?
Keep in mind for thousands of years slavery was just a 'given' and your video would be taken as 'boasting' how great the Israelites must have been for having slaves to throw around.
So why do you believe its morally wrong somehow?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo I already answered your question. Lincoln knew it was wrong as a practical matter. Society works better when all people are free to explore their full potential. Are you saying you would enslave people if you wasn't a Christian? What verses in the Bible tell you that it's not okay to enslave people now? How much would you sell your daughter for?
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Yes, we all know Abraham Lincoln was a dedicate Christian, constantly attended church and read from his Bible daily and quoted from it constantly. So we have a very good idea where he got ideas from.
And don't worry about me.
What you need to do is explain why you would think slavery was morally wrong (without borrowing from your Christian cultures morality). Yes, if I was an atheist I'd see slavery as something that could definitely benefit propagating my DNA.
You?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Again, I answered your question. Are you reading my posts? I already explained as a practical matter, society is better off if every individual in it has a chance to reach his fill potential. Sorry to hear you would enslave people if you wasn't a Christian. It really doesn't make sense to me. What verses are you using to get the idea that God doesn't approve? Lincoln apparently embraced the "doctrine of necessity," but not much else in Christianity. I know you want to think he did.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 So you believe slavery is impractical (not morally wrong) but impractical for you overall. If it were practical you would accept slavery. To you, in either case, it is not 'wrong' in any moral sense. The problem (for you) is that, from a purely practical pov, some VERY good arguments can be made to show it hugely benefits society and therefore you.
Abraham Lincoln 'apparently' was a hardcore practicing bible-believing Christians. Its not what I 'want to think' but recorded history
ElProximo 4 months ago
@foxlake02 So you believe slavery is impractical (not morally wrong) but impractical for you overall. If it were practical you would accept slavery. To you, in either case, it is not 'wrong' in any moral sense. The problem (for you) is that, from a purely practical pov, some VERY good arguments can be made to show it hugely benefits society and therefore you.
Abraham Lincoln 'apparently' was a hardcore practicing bible-believing Christians. Its not what I 'want to think' but recorded history
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Please cite your source for Lincoln professing his religion. All I ever read is that he held his beliefs private but is aid and bodyguard claimed he rejected the orthodox Christianity of his time. Also cite your source for God not approving of slavery. What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. If you can't I'll assume you don't have any and kindly ask you to STFU.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 No. You read that his bodyguard mentioned Lincoln never spoke about his religion too often. You then read about how he was raised baptist, attended a presbyterian church became increasingly religious as president, routinely prayed and so on.
You don't get to 'tell anything' or 'instruct anything here'. You are intellectually dishonest and been caught and now you get to answer to me. Well you did answer - you believe slavery is only a practical matter. Ouch!
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. - Abraham Lincoln
Since you have no citations, I'll assume you are just pulling what you want us to believe out of your ass. Thank God you are a Christian. Sounds like you would be a real asshole if it wasn't for that. How about rape and murder? Yah think you could make a good argument for that too if not for your religion?
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Stop pretending you are actually having a serious debate with me where you are in any position to be 'asking for citations'.
The Bible is not Abraham Lincolns book and Christianity was never his profession. Absolutely agreed. This is exactly something a dedicated Christian like Lincoln would say.
Why would you call rape and murder 'morally wrong'? The same reason you oppose slavery (at this time) because they are merely 'impractical' and don't benefit you (at this time)?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo It will not do to investigate the subject of religion too closely, as it is apt to lead to infidelity. - Sorry, but that's your pal Abe again
So how much for the little girl? Send me a picture and maybe I make you a rich man.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Don't apologize. That sounds like something he might say at some point in his life and doesn't change his lifelong history of church attendance, home bible readings, daily prayer.
Why do you want to buy a little girl? Is that what you're into? Buying kids?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo I just thought since God gave instruction on how to buy and sell a man's daughter... well anyway, in case you change your mind and can't find any scripture against it.
My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them. - Abraham Lincoln OUCH!
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 God gave instruction on how Israelites had to buy and sell into slavery. So you will first need to convert to Judaism. Then find yourself another tribe-member. Then you would probably want to know the slavery (in this case) is something like indentured servitude so don't get too excited before you find out what that means.
"..read his Bible diligently,..rely on God's promises .. a true Christian gentleman..he turned his heart to Christ"
Lincoln's wife = ultimate OUCH indeed.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@foxlake02 God gave instruction on how Israelites had to buy and sell into slavery. So you will first need to convert to Judaism. Then find yourself another tribe-member. Then you would probably want to know the slavery (in this case) is something like indentured servitude so don't get too excited before you find out what that means. Ultimate Citation. Lincolns wife:"..read his Bible diligently,..rely on God's promises .. a true Christian gentleman..he turned his heart to Christ"
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo ummm that wasn't a citation attributed to Lincoln but nice try. And I asked for citations AGAINST slavery. Not your interpretation of how people were commanded to enslave other people...
but nice try.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Huh? The 'citation' is supposed to 'come from Lincoln'? No it isn't you moron. You don't even seem to know what citations are outside little PMSing teen boy ways to 'fighty boy' on YT comments lol
There isn't 'interpretations' on Israelite slavery. There are instructions. You quoted some of those instructions on HOW to have slaves. There were rules on how NOT to have slaves as well. What about it? Do you have some problem with it?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo It doesn't pay to lie when we can just look back at my post. I said "citation attributed to Lincoln". If you are going to be that dishonest we are done. You made the assertion that Lincoln was a Christian. Now show the evidence or STFU.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 I showed the evidence Lincoln was a Christian. Now you have to STFU and realize you got self-pwned you dummy lol
ElProximo 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElProximo Oh yeah, his wife said he was. Even though he said, "My earlier views of the unsoundness of the Christian scheme of salvation and the human origin of the scriptures, have become clearer and stronger with advancing years and I see no reason for thinking I shall ever change them", but you keep on believing. Just ignore that one if it doesn't fit your fairy tale.
foxlake02 4 months ago
Rape and Murder are impractical for any society. History shows that all human societies whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or any other religion, none condone it as a matter of common sense. Even piranha do not eat there own in a feeding frenzy. They are not Christian piranha, it's just that they would not survive as a species if they did.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02
So you could accept rape and murder if and when it were providing practical benefits to society as a whole?
Rape and murder were entirely practical in some societies at certain times. Vikings flourished and grew in wealth, power, improving living conditions, health and safety and nearly every aspect of a society directly from rape and murder.
So those rapes and murders were 'right' according to your standards.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo ummmm the Vikings are gone. Replaced by people who were better at living together. Do I have to draw you a picture? It is better as individuals and as a group if we can all just get along. You don't need fables from goat herders to figure that one out. Nice dodge but you still owe me a few citations. Lincoln was an historical figure. You didn't know him personally any more than I did so it's all you have to make your case.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 The Vikings were replaced by people who were better at living together? No, they stayed exactly where they were and became Christians. They embraced Christianity and accepted that rape and murder were morally wrong regardless of the practical benefits to their society.
But why are you 'ummming' about the Vikings. The point was made that you only oppose rape and murder when they are impractical. Right?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo I oppose rape and murder because as a practical matter it is wrong. Why do other religions oppose it then? The Vikings as a social unit are no more. Yes many people are ancestors of them just as we have ancestors to American Indians. European nations are much less Christian statistically than in the US. Especially the Scandinavian countries. hmmm, them damn Nordic backsliders!
foxlake02 4 months ago
Comment removed
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 You wouldn't have any problem with the Norwegians raping and murdering again IF they could show it benefits them again. What if a majority of us decide that its practical to have you raped and killed? I mean you wouldn't like the feeling but you would certainly have to agree it was 'right' (at that time).
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Again there is absolutely no circumstances where it is justified. Our Constitution not only allows for rule by consensus but also protects the rights of the minority. Try reading what I post. Not what you can warp my words into. You are starting to get tedious.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@ElProximo My point is that I can see absolutely no circumstances in the real world where rape, murder, or SLAVERY could ever be justified. If you think that it was of for some people to enslave other people because God said to do it then I have to believe you are a fool. I also think we as a society should not be torturing our prisoners but it seems the Christian right in the US think it's okay. Point being, Christians do not have a monopoly on what is good for humanity and what is not.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 You think slavery is wrong because of the Christian culture you grew up in. Otherwise, you could easily see many circumstances where slavery would most definitely have practical benefits. You also believe 'waterboarding' to save 100's of innocent lives is the correct moral choice. Let's get real here. This all comes down to you hating the USA. Which is (in your heart) your 'parents'. You hate God (parents) and you just want to argue and fight to hurt and ruin it. Yes?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo I am a product of my culture just as you are. If we lived in the south 200 years ago maybe we would be arguing about why it's okay to own slaves. That would be to your advantage. Then you could actually cite scripture to back up your claim. It doesn't look like you can find any against it so far. hehehehe
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 No. 200 years ago you would be likely be opposed to slavery since almost nobody in your western culture was 'for' such a thing. I would very likely be part of an 'abolitionist church movement' and reminding people that 'There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus' and recalling how the Church banned slavery as soon as it could do so in Rome. If we lived 200 years ago. (actually I'd be in Norway farming more likely).
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Mr. Lincoln's maxim and philosophy were: 'What is to be, will be, and no prayers of ours can arrest the decree. He never joined any Church. He was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian. - Mary Todd Lincoln...just can't make up her mind can she?
The abolitionist movement was in the northern states 200 years ago. I said had we lived in the south with southern Christian culture.
foxlake02 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ElProximo Mr. Lincoln's maxim and philosophy were: 'What is to be, will be, and no prayers of ours can arrest the decree. He never joined any Church. He was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian. - Mary Todd Lincoln...just can't make up he mind can she?
The abolitionist movement was in the northern states 200 years ago. I said had we lived in the south with southern Christian culture.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@ElProximo He never joined any Church. He was a religious man always, I think, but was not a technical Christian. - Mary Todd Lincoln...just can't make up he mind can she?
The abolitionist movement was in the northern states 200 years ago. I said had we lived in the south with southern Christian culture.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 If you lived in the South in a Christian culture 200 years ago you would probably be a slave and happy to learn that the overwhelming majority of Christians would easily defeat any Christian justifications for slavery.
But hey.. none of this is 'wrong or right' to you so don't worry about it.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Again, there is no circumstance where slavery is justified. I can not see any place that is would be an advantage in human culture. Not even 4000 years ago by Jewish tribes.
But I guess you think it was okay right?
foxlake02 4 months ago
@ElProximo So I hate my country and my parents and God too hey? Well thanks for telling me what I think. It's pretentious ass clowns like you that give your religion a bad name. You don't know me from Adam and you have no idea how much I love my country or my parents. I can't really hate your version of a sky daddy if I don't believe in him either.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Sure and you don't deny any of it. That's what this all about after all. How much you just hate God and you hate anything in the USA that represents God or even reminds you of Jesus Christ or any thoughts you will one day meet your Maker.
That's all this is about.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo My parents are not religious people. I actually agree with my father's outlook on religion. Fuck you for suggesting that I hate him. The secret prisons our country has been involved in torturing prisoners will only make individual citizens feel justified doing it to their enemies or even their children. It degrades us all as a society.
Oh and fuck you for thinking I hate my country too you pompous ass.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Here is the question we might need to start looking at: Is it time to separate you from the USA into your own nation. You can call it 'New Sodom' or whatever you want. It might even be a current State. Then separated. Would you consider that?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Why is it time for me to separate myself from my country? Because you say so? I'll consider trying to make my country a better place by handing people like you your ass when you come up with this kind of stupidity. Trying to justify your dogma by rewriting history and accusing those who disagree with you of hatred. All the time using religion to justify torture and ignorance. There are quite a few of countries where religion is the government. Look how good they are doing.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Drop it already. We know you were caught here manipulating history (very pathetic atheist website revisionism) and we know you are doing it for propaganda purposes but lets stop there. At this point I don't want you in our society. You hate Christianity in your society. So now its time to discuss separation. (I didn't say expulsion or smashing your face in). I'm asking if you will consider voluntarily separating and having your own independent atheist nation? If no - why not?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Actually, I was looking over quite a few different sites to refresh what I have known for years about Lincoln and about slavery. Why not? Because I love my country. My parents and children and friends live here. I appreciate the Constitution and that includes the principle of a wall of separation between church and state. If you want to live in a country with a Christian run government then you leave. Don't let the door hit you (or that mouse in your pocket) on the way out.
Bye
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 I definitely would love to live in a Christian-run government. I (mostly) do now. They protect the separation of Church and State concept Christians invented and invited and love. You don't want to live in a separate independent 'atheist' country because you know it would go to hell quickly. You are the weakest kind of person (in the worst way) in that you love living in your parents (Christianity) house but want to squeal hate at your parents for how lame they are lol
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Still telling me what I think hey? Keep being an ass clown. You're fun to laugh at. Most right wing fundamentalists in this country will not even admit that there is a separation of church and state. They want to pretend the First Amendment doesn't even mean what it says. You do know that many of the signers of the Constitution were not Christian right? Guess you had better rewrite that history too. While you are at it rewrite the history of life on earth too.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Christians invented separation of church and state. It's what came about when Christians (which is nearly every single Signer) get together. What's fascinating about you is how you read an atheist website and some very very bad revisionism. You accept that as 'Gospel truth of history' and now go about amazed and offended anyone is trying to 'rewrite it' lol. Wow.. you are an easy dupe! Let's hope you never get invited to take a free Scientology exam.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo I did not go to a single "atheist website for my understanding of how the framers of the Constitution felt about religion. It's common knowledge many were not Christian. Thanks for admitting the Tea Party doesn't know what they are talking about.
The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason - Benjamin Franklin
I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature - Thomas Jefferson
Still waiting for your citation for God condemning slavery. Can't?
Didn't think so.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Of course you got that from some idiotic atheist website and you are so goofy you think you can select out some quote and ohhh... wow... that PROVES they were all atheists! You got me!
Two. 2. Two people is all you could find? One is a hardcore Christian Deist and the other 'might' be called a Christian Deist.
So you have 2 people who were Christian Deists and will you now admit that nearly EVERY single signer was a Christian? I think you just did. Nice self-ownage idiot.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo If that is true then you must admit that Hitler was a "hardcore Christian Deist" too. LOL I'd say they were all politicians. You cherry pick whatever you want but the fact is Jefferson was afraid of how religion would screw up government. That's why he worked hard for a "wall of separation". Also Article Five says there will be no religious test to hold any office. It is a secular government. Stop pretending it's not.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Jefferson wrote a diest bible ffs. This isn't a mystery. He pretty much goes on and on about Christianity and how much he likes Jesus principles. You are talking about separation of church and state (the principles) AS IF that argues against Christians or Christianity. No it does not. Christians (especially in this situation) were crazy for the idea (since many were persecuted by 'officially Anglican/Catholic etc governments). Christians teach you this. You aren't revealing it.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Is that the best you can do? Jefferson was a deist that liked Jesus principles? Nothing you said makes our government any less secular. I have a right to not believe your religion just like Jefferson. I like some things in the Bible too but I think fundamentalist dogma is silly. The first and sixth amendment protects both sides that way. That's why Ben Stein is an idiot trying to get religious dogma taught as science in our schools.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 I don't need to do anything more than point out two (and possibly three) of the 'founding fathers' were Christian Deists. This is debatable since some say Franklin was far more orthodox than he might have appeared (or later in life). So what you need to do is admit your mistake.
There is a second problem. Despite REPEATEDLY EXPLAINING THIS TO YOU you keep pretending to argue with a 'Christian Theocracy Proponent' and YOU ARE NOT. So what is wrong with you? Are you retarded?
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Seriously pal. You have to warp a lot of word meanings and a lot of history to call this a Christian run government. Look up the word secular and tell me why is is not a good description of our government. Look up the word deist and tell me how being one makes a person a Christian. Simply declaring that your interpretation of dogma is right and the rest are not "true" believers is as old as human history.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 There isn't any 'warping' to be done. Almost ALL of your USA reps are Christians. It isn't near the 99% levels at the beginning but yes you most definitely have sizable % of Christians running the USA right now. It is a secular government. why are you pretending this is some kind of claim you are fighting for? The word 'Christian Deist' may well have various meanings but here is what we do know: It DOES NOT MEAN ATHEIST. derp
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo You are the only one throwing around the word atheist here. I never said they were or that I was one. Think before you post.
derp a derp
foxlake02 4 months ago
@ElProximo Really man, it's like you are calling people demons or something terrible with horns and a pitch fork or something. An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in a God or Gods. I never told you how I believe except to say I reject your silly version of God. It's pretty clear that Jefferson and Franklin didn't think much of the religious crap of their day either.
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Jefferson and Franklin thought a lot about religion. If you looked them up on wiki you could find entire chapters covering their (often complicated, sometimes simple) Christian views. Others are not only devoted Christians (or many a denomination) but even Pastors and Clergy. "You do know that many of the signers of the Constitution were not Christian right?" 2 = many? They produced separation of Church and State. You didn't. Atheists didn't. You should thank those Christians.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo Most historians count George Washington as deist but not particularly Christian too. My point is that this is not a Christian run government. There is no religious test to be in government. Proclaiming Christianity does not make you one. Hitler claimed to be Christian too. Do you think he was?
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 Most of your representatives are Christians including your President. I certainly do agree nobody knows the hearts or who is a 'said christian' or who is hardcore. This is also true for people like Franklin who might have 'talked the deist talk' but was really far more orthodox than he came across. My point is that when Christian have nearly total control of government they make..... a secular government with separation of church and state. maybe this does need to change??
ElProximo 4 months ago
Comment removed
foxlake02 4 months ago
@ElProximo This is another point you seem to disagree with the Tea Party wingnuts. They think Obama is a secret Muslim born in Kenya that hates America and white people. LOL
I have no problem with people who have a particular faith in office so long as they can separate their dogma from their duties. I actually think our president is doing this very well.
foxlake02 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@foxlake02 Jefferson and Franklin thought a lot about religion. If you looked them up on wiki you could find entire chapters covering their (often complicated, sometimes simple) Christian views. Others are not only devoted Christians (or many a denomination) but even Pastors and Clergy. "You do know that many of the signers of the Constitution were not Christian right?" 2? They produced separation of Church and State. You didn't. Atheists didn't. You should thank those Christians.
ElProximo 4 months ago
@ElProximo It is actually Article VI, paragraph 3. I had to check with my atheist website to refresh my memory. hehehehe
foxlake02 4 months ago
@ElProximo If only God would give me some clear sign! Like making a large deposit in my name at a Swiss bank. - Not Abe but I kinda liked it. :))
How's them citations coming along? Still diggin?
foxlake02 4 months ago
@foxlake02 How are your citations coming along? I'm still waiting?
Do you think rape and murder is morally wrong? Or just impractical at this time?
ElProximo 4 months ago
Darwin's theory(and it is only a theory it has never been proved), adopted by the Germans under Hitler led to the demise of more than 50 million people during world war 2 and hundreds of thosands more in the preceding years, mentally and physically handicapped people (useless mouths so called by the Germans).
It is not generally known that Darwin was confined in a lunatic asylum for a considerable period of time,it has been "airbrushed from history".
rhq100 8 months ago
Ben Stein might be the smartest idiot ever.
alphaenemy 8 months ago
There is no connection. Hitler was deeply religious, hence the holocaust. Hitler actually burned science books, including Darwin's.
Ozzyman200 8 months ago 3
Hitler continued Darwin’s idea. Darwin believed in the survival of the fittest all of these theories began with him
After Darwin people like Frances Galton using Darwin’s theory came up with EUGENICS look it up if you don’t know what it is because the media doesn’t like atheists to know what Darwin and others who don’t believe in God really want to do to this world. We are not God and we can’t act like God it is much worse for humanity
croatloveo1 8 months ago
Ok guys, looky here. You christians out there looking for anything to make atheists look bad find Hitler, who was very Catholic and justified his actions by claiming-"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator." Now, darwin only helped explain the diversity of life on earth. He did not intend that his theory be misrepresented and twisted into "social darwinism" in where we apply the harsh, flawed rules of the animal kingdom to mankind. We can think rationally.
ItsEasyIfYouThink 8 months ago
Lmfao what does this have to do with evolution? It's Ironic that Nazi style propaganda would compare Nazi's to The theory of Evolution with a Zionist Jew for Jesus hosting it. What's even funnier is that though controversial Hitler had some very good ideas.
InKa4484 9 months ago
As stupid as Ben Stein is, he unintentionally makes a good point here. Society shouldn't be keeping the weak alive. It only drags down the overall species.
SteinUndStahl666 9 months ago
@1805902349
Sadly, yeah, people all over the Western world place far too much importance on materialism.
Still, if you look at almost any list of the world's happiest countries, the secular ones are always at the top.
SteinUndStahl666 10 months ago
hitler was a Christian. The Nazis were Christians. The German people were Christians.
Atheism is a very small minority even today. What do you think it was in 1930's Germany?
odinata 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We should take all the semen from the blond people and put in in the Negros in Africa they don't care anyway. they run around like animals and shit. peacefully.
omega4chimp 1 year ago
And I love the quote you used by that Fyodor Dostoevsky fellow "If God does not exist, everything is permitted!" So then since the Nazis were permitted to do such horrible acts, that should suggest then that God does not exist correct? For if God did exist he wouldn't permit them to do those things! But they did!!! Ha
VitalSigns1 1 year ago
Hitler and all the Nazis believed in God in fact. I'll concede that they weren't true, loving Christians, but who are you to question someone else's faith? So you're suggesting that an evolutionist can't be a Christian? That's fucking absurd. You really don't know what you're talking about, and it looks like most people here can see that.
VitalSigns1 1 year ago
@VitalSigns1
How can somebody accept both evolution and Christianity when the latter has a creation story that contradicts the former?
SteinUndStahl666 10 months ago
@SteinUndStahl666 Christianty only has to do with CHRIST. Christ's teachings - THAT'S IT. If you believe in the morals of Christ, such as love your neighbor, do unto others as they would do unto you, then you may call yourself a Christian.
VitalSigns1 10 months ago
@VitalSigns1
Yeah, but everything we know about Jesus comes from the Bible. So if you believe in Jesus, that means you trust the Bible. So if you trust the BIble, shouldn't you believe everything in it? I never understood these so-called Christians who say the Bible is God's word, but then they decided they don't believe everything in it.
SteinUndStahl666 10 months ago
Cant u read English or are u ppl so ignorant to truth what?? it`s obvious hitler embraced the darvinism and use it for probaganda to right the killing of other races.
asimolok 1 year ago
hitler was catholic
FlyinSpaghettiMnstr7 1 year ago
If Atheism is so dangerous, how come the countries with the highest amount of Atheists such as Sweden, Estonia, the Czech Republic, and Iceland are some of the happiest and safest places in the world?
And yes, Hitler was most likely not a Christian. However, the majority of his followers were.
SteinUndStahl666 1 year ago
@SteinUndStahl666 the day all those counties involve themselves wid american politics especially against *athesit communist* china & influencing world events I'll ask this question to u :) until then just knw being willingly immoral [which these countries may not be] doesnt mean they are peaceful.
younib100 1 year ago
@younib100
There are plenty of countries that aren't involved in influencing world events like America does, and they don't have the high standard of living that those Atheistic countries have.
Whose talking about being immoral? Secular countries actually have a far lower crime rate, and a far higher amount of civil liberties, than religious countries do.
SteinUndStahl666 1 year ago
@SteinUndStahl666 define crime ... in a ISlamic place were sex does happen & no ppl dont get flogged it's considered a immoral thing but in ur place no 1 wud give a damn b/c its normal. ur culture has a different outlook on crime & social immorality which is y u feel ur better. the same thing in reliigous countires. they feel their values INFLUENCED by reliigon is better but thnx to economic poverty & corrupt/oppressive regimes supported or atleast held in high esteem by USA u have chaos.
younib100 1 year ago
There are plenty of countries that aren't involved in influencing world events like America does name a few except germany & ST korea
i think it's high time u watch wats goin around in the world rathering simply believing BECAUSE they are athestic socities u enjoy ur life. economic prosperity leads to better lifestyles not views on religion. [agonostic or athestic or religion]
ps. Secularism is not the opposite of religion atheism is.so dont mist ur religious views wid politics :)
younib100 1 year ago
It's not about religion its the fact that you are all "useless eaters" in the words of Henry Kissinger and they want the world population to be 500 million. Its fuckin written in stone in 8 different languages on the highest hilltop in Georgia. Hitler was an occultist not a fucking christian, the swastika is a sun wheel it comes from Tibetan mysticism. haha everyones so blind where do you think all the Nazi scientists went after WWII america took em in.
SevenLeggedWalrus 1 year ago
The most ironic thing for Christians who try to compare Evolution with Nazism is that Nazis BURNED Darwin's books in the rallies, and actually used Martin Luther's book "The Jews and their Lies", as a roadmap for what they did to the Jews. The Nazi movement was overwealmingly Christian, with the same suspicions held against non-Christians that American Evangelicals have today. I challenge Christians to read Martin Luther's book on the Jews and say that the Nazis didn't follow it to the letter.
MinstrelKrampf 1 year ago
@MinstrelKrampf
In all fairness, Nazism was based heavily on Social Darwinism, and Hitler was a big believer in evolution. Yes, they burnt Darwin's books for propaganda reasons, but Hitler also writes about evolution and its importance in breeding a new man in both Mein Kampf and his second book.
What is hypocritical is that Christians point out Hitler's Darwinism, but never acknowledge that the vast majority of his followers were Christian.
SteinUndStahl666 1 year ago
it doesn't matter if someone is religious or not, once a human understands that there is no divine hand to stop them from conquering the world, they will stop at nothing except a collective group with more force to prevent them from doing a campaign that is not within their interests
SurfbyShootin 1 year ago
This is interesting, because Ben Stein is Jewish, and most Jews today believe in evolution and are socially liberal, whereas he is the exact opposite. The quotes from Hitler and also what the lady said really hit the nail on the head. Skeptics always use quotes from "Mein Kampf" such as "a fox will always remain a fox,...", etc., when they are missing the point. Evolution says that all living things need to compete to survive. Well, doesn't that apply to humans, too, and Hitler's views???
travitheMuffinMan 1 year ago
Actually, I think his ideology abused evolution more to profit his worldview.
Remember, many scientists and Nobels price-winners before that, where jewish.
besmb2105 1 year ago
What a joke this video is... Ben Stein and his fellow ashkeNAZI Jews have been practicing eugenics for hundreds of years. This is why they have much higher IQs than everyone else. Jews want you to always look somewhere else, rather than look at them. Jews in the media started the 'Obama being a muslim thing', so you won't realize he is a Jew puppet... And for the record you can't choose to be an atheist, it's just what i am...
CriticalDissection 1 year ago 8
Comment removed
CriticalDissection 1 year ago
Using Hitler as a "follower" of evolution is low and disgusting. The link if any is meaningless because the evidence for evolution stands on its own. Further, Hitler was a teetotaler, a vegitarian etc. Should we condemn those people because of a link with Hitler? Start drinking and eat meat because Hitler didn't. Should we condemn those who paint landscapes or men with moustaches? These are lame attacks.
jamespiperca 1 year ago
..it's sad to say; but, that's essentially the case. I've debated Catholics endlessly over the last 20 years and you'd be dumbfounded at the lack of knowledge they have of scripture or the outright blasphemous things they think are in scripture and are not. I quoted Christ to a Catholic apologist once with out giving attribution. He flamed back at me and said what I was saying was blasphemy.
When I gave him the citation, the earth nearly flipped poles. He denies he said it now.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Well yes indeed, I've seen a fair bit of that too, though generally I've found Islam to be far worse. It has been a long time since I've studied the bible myself- but then that doesn't bother me. It's the book of myths that happened to be popular in my culture when I was born there, but not much more than that. There are plenty of good bits, and the NT redeems it a lot, but there's also plenty of evil and nonsense.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 You'd have to point out where the evil and nonsense is. Much of what people mistake for Christian ills end up being the ills of pseudo christian cults that Christians get blamed for. I won't say christians haven't screwed the pooch now and then; but, largely they police their own. They were warning about Jim Jones long before the press or the law enforcement got involved, then it turned out Jones was CIA and his people were murdered. Koolaid is the popular fiction.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
There is a great deal of evil nonsense, mostly in the OT. Talking snakes, zombies, pillars of salt, the wandering Jew, the Earth having corners etc. There is also plenty of evil- drowning the whole world, rape, pillage, genocide all over.
Christians have a pretty poor record of policing their own I'm afraid. There are so many infighting factions, we can look back on most actions and find someone who condemned it though. Sorry, I don't know Jim Jones.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 "There is a great deal of evil nonsense, mostly in the OT. Talking snakes, zombies, pillars of salt, the wandering Jew, the Earth having corners etc. There is also plenty of evil- drowning the whole world, rape, pillage, genocide all over."
Taken out of context it may seem so. But in context, not so much. I'd have to check on talking snakes.. can't say I remember that one. Certainly no zombies in the scriptures. But, yeah, God saw the earth full of evil and man corrupted...
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
It's not taken out of context. It seems you have a filter that allows you to interpret what you read as good regardless of the body count. The talking snake was in the garden of Eden. The Jewish zombies, including Jesus, rose when he did apparently.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 .. but the story of the flood isn't about evil, it's about genetics. Genesis 6 states that the line of men was corrupted and God killed everyone save for 8 uncorrputed peopjle to end the genetic tampering. That is in the text.
As to policing their own.. not really. Christians have attempted endlessly to police their own but usually find themselves up against persecution and folks like you who won't listen when others warn them that, "hey, that's a cult, not a christian group."
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
I'm not aware of genetic tampering, but then it's been a while since I read it. Even if that's the case though, to my mind, genocide is still a bad thing. Even if god was really really angry, he shouldn't just kill everyone. There are other better ways. You really can't condemn Hitler for what he did. He was following god's example. If the genes were the problem, god could have just stopped them breeding- problem solved.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 ..I know that Dr. Walter Martin and his peers, for instance, were way ahead of the curve on Jim Jones and no one listened to them. Later, the same folks that wouldn't listen were the first to point the finger at Christians out of ignorance. That's just the way it is. People don't bother finding out the truth before pointing fingers and to the extent they're warned, they don't listen. Same was so with Hitler. Who listened to Churchill until it was too late?
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Perhaps that's the case, but personally I'm against all cults, including religions. That's not to say they're all quite the same. Christianity is now going through a relatively peaceful period, mainly redeemed by a recent focus on the peaceful messages of the NT. Christianity is certainly bigger and older than scientology, but how can you say one is a cult, and not the other? 2000 years ago christianity was not unlike cults we see now.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
As to research. 20+ years in comparative religion. How long have you studied comparative religion?
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Rather less than what you claim, but I have no evidence of that beyond your word. I have been a scientist for about the same time. I value science, with its basis in reality, i.e. evidence and objectivity rather more. Also note than generally those who study religion more, especially comparative religion tend to be atheists. You are something of an anomaly there though there's nothing wrong with that of course.
Good to get a civil debate here btw, so thank you for that.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
Yes, I admit to being something of an anomaly, and I know it throws some people. But, Dr. Walter Martin was really the founder of the field amongst those studying the christian cults primarily and that's largely the basis of my study.
And there is no reason that debate needs to be uncivil. I can be uncivil when it's called for. I tend to be frank and to the point anyway; but, only because I think that being direct and being honest are requirements, not electives.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Fair enough. Sorry, not familiar with him either. I don't know my Americans that well.
Yes, good to have a civil debate, they can so often degenerate on youtube.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
Unless you're a christian and a minister, it's unlikely you would know him. That or you'd have to be involved in the same field or something. The guy founded the field in the modern day and wrote texts that are essential to any minister's library where understanding cults is concerned. He wasn't infallible; but, he provided serious and quite accurate work that clarifies the situation quite well. Primary work is called "Kingdom of the cults." And this isn't the only place debates degen fast
havoc092 1 year ago
At 5 minutes into the video - hitler removed religion from school carriculum and tried removing God from society. Apparently you don't bother to even fact check when facts are right under your noses.
havoc092 1 year ago
Actually HItler was not only a Christian but a creationist.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 More propaganda. Hitler was a pagan. He and his SS were into the occult. They fawned over Catholicism and cut deals with the Catholic church because Hitler saw himself largely as finishing what the Catholic church had started - the destruction of jews. Guys like you either don't care about the facts or have never bothered studying them.
I've got over 20 years in comparative religion studies centering on Catholicism as a major area. Hitler wasn't a christian or a catholic.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Ignore propaganda. If you actually look at the evidence of his words and actions yourself Hitler was very Chrisian. What they did was based on the Bible.
The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger. - Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. i, ch. xi For it was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. - Adolf Hitler, creationist, Mein Kampf, vol. ii, ch. x
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 No, hitler was a politician establishing a firm beach-head of support so that he could get away with what he had planned. One can't look at the history of what Hitler was and what he did and conclude that he was a christian. One has to ignore everything except for the most superficial and naive of records.
Jim Jones similarly referenced the will of God. Jones too was a cult leader, not a christian. He was also a CIA asset. What God were either referencing?...
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Yes indeed, he was a politician, no one knows for sure what he thought. He said a lot to gain support indeed. However both his words and actions strongly suggest he was Christian. He was able to back up what he did with the bible. You cannot see his actions and conclude he wasn't Christian.
Sorry, I'm not familiar with Jim Jones. There are a lot of divisions even amongst Christians. Yes, it's odd they can't agree.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 No, his words and actions suggest no such thing, unless christianity had never been defined by the Apostles. This is the same crap logic I run into daily with cultists. Some believe they're going to be gods and claim to be christian. Again, fine if Judeochristian roots hadn't been monotheistic from the start and excluding any possibilitiy of any other god ever existing. Christianity isn't a club that you join. It has specific beliefs that must be adhered to.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
You're just not looking at the facts. You're commiting the not a true scotsman fallacy. You need to look at his actions, not just what he paid lipservice to, although his actions matched his words in most cases. How is Christianity not a cult? You have your version of Christianity, he had his, why is yours better than his? Look at his actions. Do some research for yourself. You are entitled to your opinions, but they need to match the facts.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
Actually, I have looked quite extensively at the facts over time. And looking at his actions is what I did. You're echoing me apparently in hopes of confusing the record. So, I'd simply point people in the direction of the literature and say go look.
Next, Version of christianity. No. The New testament wasn't released in multiple flavors. And when you diverge from the normative definition, you're into the cult aspect - pseudo-christian rather than christian.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
No, really, you need to look into this yourself. You keep claiming that I haven't, as though you're going to fool anyone. You're not.
He had one version of Christianity, you have yours, his is just different from yours, that's all.
"The New testament wasn't released in multiple flavors."
Yes it was, there are many translations, many versions. Not only that, but various sects of Christianity have their own versions and other holy books beyond the NT.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
No, sorry. Christianity is very specifically defined. It's why we have language and rules of language. What you're saying is that he can have a car if he says he's a licensed driver and is riding a unicycle which he calls a car. No. that devolves language and meaning.
He didn't have his version and someone else theirs. That's why the cults were defined amongst christians, to point out those whe were merely using christianity toward another agenda - hiding behind it rather than being..
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
I do agree with your first paragraph, but the bible is enormously open to interpretation. Else why are there so many different denominations that can't agree with each other? Aren't they all reading from the same book. The WBC is able to back up everything they do with bible quotes. You can't fault them on that. The same with Hitler. The problem seems to be the contradictions in the bible. I do appreciate the NT is much more about lvoe than the OT of course.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
Not really. The Bible contains parables. That I will grant you; but, they're understood two ways - one by christians and another by unbelievers. The way they're understood by unbelievers is expected. They were considered wartime messages and functioned as such. Most of them are metaphors that are understood by actual christians. But the metaphors are code to mislead those who aren't in on the plot. They were intended to mask the purpose of christs ministry - which was to die for salvation
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
"Most of them are metaphors that are understood by actual christians. But the metaphors are code to mislead those who aren't in on the plot."
Now that's pretty unlikely. The problem is there are 100s of Christian groups each one claiming that only they have the correct interpretation and all the others aren't true christians. And it's the same with every other holy book. Surely if they were actually written by gods they'd be clear.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 Actually, it's exactly what was going on. Christ told the apostles and it's recorded in at least 3 of the gospels that he would deliver the mystery of salvation to the crowds in parables only and relate it directly to them in private because it was not given to them to know. This, as it happens, was a fulfillment of prophecy that this would be the case. Do you know anything at all about Christianity or is it just another religion to you? Curious.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
None of us know what Christ said of course, beyond the character in the book, nor even if he existed.
I know a great deal about Christianity, having been raised as a Christian, going through Christian schools most of my life. Mainly Methodist and CofE, so fairly liberal though. I excelled in scripture. Generally those who studied religion and did well are atheists because it tends to fall apart on examination.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
..to that extent, it's really easy to tell who understands them and is on the reservation and who doesn't and is therefore off the reservation. Otherwise, the language is quite accurate and simply doesn't allow for the vast interpretation you would have me believe it does. I know better. The text was written in a language specifically intended to avoid confusion. Greek. If you know the rules of greek established under Alexander's direction, misunderstanding it takes work.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
If what you say is true, then why are theists so divided? Why do people talk to god and read his various books and all get such different messages? It's just like the emporer's new clothes- people see something different, a few see nothing.
The huge problem with priests, theists generally, doing studies like theology is the enormous bias they have from the start. Almost all theologists have such a bias which hugely compromises theology.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 The key word is theists. Unbelievers aren't supposed to get it. Most who claim christianity aren't christians. They rather are followers of this philosophy or that. Christ warned you can't serve two masters. And this is what they attempt to do without thinking anything about it. They follow a philosopher and will burn the Bible to defend the philoosphyl.
And you're correct about theological bias. There are far more out there looking for a paycheck rather than truth.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
"Unbelievers aren't supposed to get it."
That's really no different from the Emporer's new clothes. Only those who believe in the clothes are able to see them and fully understand them. I dare say people who can see the clothes and have spent decades studying the cut of the jacket have become experts, but they still miss the true understanding.
One way to tell is this- do those who agree he has clothes agree on anything about them, or are they many contradictory versions?
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 Actually, yes it is. Because it isn't a matter of mere faith. Again, it's more akin to sending out a coded message in wartime. Allies are supposed to understand the code and arrive at normandy while the enemy doesn't get it and winds up at Calais. The interesting thing is that Christ used metaphors that had been employed prior in the scriptures so that anyone who understood the scriptures would have the ability to figure it out. But, most often, those metaphors are lost on them.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
But how do you know that your code is correct? How do you know someone else's isn't? Preachers preach the Garden of Eden myth in church for example. Some christians take it as literal truth, some say metaphor. There are so many different interpretations, each group claiming theirs is the only true one. The same goes for most holy books.
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 It generally just takes study. And that's something most people don't do in a day or a week. Most passive readers latch onto something that may sound odd and never look again. People grab a sentence out of context and turn it into something it never was. I can't do a full defense of position in this space; but, that said, it isn't that difficult to get to the truth if one is actually intereseted in what the truth is. And egos have to be moved out of the way.
havoc092 1 year ago
@havoc092
Hi, strangely that comment didn't come up in my box. Quite odd.
Your response is just what others with different interpretations, such as Hitler, WBC, The Pope etc, would say about theirs too. How can you be sure you're being objective and everyone else is wrong? If it isn't difficult, then why is it so incredibly rare that two theists, let alone christians, will agree with each other on even the basics such as the nature of god, or the main messages of the bible?
Ozzyman200 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 Yeah, it's what most of the cults try to hide behind and I'm aware of that; but, the language, again, is not so loose as to escape examination. People look crosseyed at words when it comes to religion more than if they were reading any other book. And it's nuts. The bible uses all the normative forms of language with all the same grammer; so, it's really not difficult language wise to get to the meaning. Problem is, most want you to filter it through them.
havoc092 1 year ago
@Ozzyman200 Hitler publically payed lipservice to the Catholic church in order to score political points in public. Privately he was deep into the occult. This is not a matter of opinion. And the two worlds are mutually exclusive. So there is literally no way to paint the man as a christian other than from utter ignorance of the term or the facts.
havoc092 1 year ago
Actually Hilter did not believe in the Theory of Evolution.
petehjr1 1 year ago 5
@petehjr1 Actually, yes he did. In the English translation of Mein Kampf, the word "evolution" is translated as "development"
tate22000 1 year ago
@tate22000 LIar. I read "Mein Kampf" in german, there's no mention of evolution whatsoever. But God is mentioned all the time. Hitler banned all books by Darwin and Haeckel related to Evolutionary Theory. He used specific creationist arguments against interracial marriage.
leungchaan 1 year ago
@leungchaan Don't take my word for it: "The German Führer. . . has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution." (Arthur Keith, Evolution and Ethics, p.230. This man is an evolutionary anthropologist.)
tate22000 1 year ago
@leungchaan Bullshit. Hitler mentions "Providence" but not "God." And Darwin was NEVER "banned."
Tom David
Minneapolis
TomDavid88 10 months ago
@TomDavid88 Oh, yes, he was. The blacklist was published in "die Bücherei", the nazi-regime's official magazine for lending-libraries. And they didn't ban just a few books, they dedicated a whole paragraph to "primitive darwinism" (sic), which included all works by Darwin and Haeckel plus all works by other authors related to darwinism. That's recorded history, mate. And yes, Hitler mentions "Gott" quite a few times in "mein Kampf", not just "Vorsehung". I can post some quotes, if you insist.
leungchaan 10 months ago
@leungchaan I'm honestly interested in seeing your evidence that they "banned" Darwin. I have never heard of this and highly doubt it.
Also, as far as I can remember, Hitler mentions "Providence" and speaks of the "Eternal Creator" but never mentions any belief in "God." Hitler's "Table Talk" I've found to be the best insite into his mind. But, post some quotes where he mentions his belief in "Gott" if you have any.
Tom David
Minneapolis
TomDavid88 10 months ago