Saturday, September 25, 2010

Lucia Paul Bennett UPDATED

I've made a mistake with Paul Bennett. He isn't who I thought he was. He's emailed me with his private details and I believe him.

His latest comments (which were deleted) are below:


Firstly, I thought I’d share a quote from Hitler taken from the same source that Ropata used for his quote that he posted earlier.

Hitler was opposed to atheism because he was a spiritual man: “atheism… is a return to the state of the animal…” (Hitler’s Table Talk, pg 59).

Now I thought I’d share a link to the following site:
http://www.nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm

Now, to put the contents of this site in perspective, it uses material from the following sources and more, including “Hitler’s Table Talk” where the initial quote came from.

My post may be deleted, again, but I’m only attempting to show the evidence that actually exists.

I realise, that people may not like the evidence, but if you choose to ignore it, I do feel that it shows a similar attitude to that displayed by “Holocaust Deniers”.

List of some of the sources used on the site:

Steigmann-Gall, Richard “The Holy Reich: Nazi Conception of Christianity, 1919-1945”, Cambridge University Press, 2003

Carroll, James, “Constantantine’s Sword: The Church and the Jews”, Houghton Mifflin Company, 2001

Goldhagen, Daniel Johah , “Hitler’s Willing Executioners”, Alfred A. Knoph, NY, 1996

Wollenberg, Jorg, Ed., “The German Public and the Persecution of the Jews 1933-1945: No One Participated, No One Knew”, (Chapter: When the Witnesses Were Silent, The Confessing Church and the Jews, by Wolfgang Gerlach), Humanities Press, New Jersey, 1996

Neumann, Johann, “1945: The German Churches Before and Afterwards”, 1995

Snyder, Louis L., “Hitler’s Elite, Shocking Profiles of the Reich’s Most Notorious Henchmen”, " Berkley Books, 1990

Helmreich, Ernst Christian, “The German Churches Under Hitler”, Wayne State University Press, 1979

Toland, John, “Adolf Hitler”, Anchor Books Doubleday, 1976

Hitler, Adolf, “Mein Kampf”, translated by Ralph Manheim, Houghton Mifflin Company, 1971

*

Lucia Maria,
Firstly, thanks for re-posting my comments on your blog, I really appreciate it.
Secondly, as I commented to Matt Flannagan over on the M&M blog, after I’d seen him in real life debate Dr Raymond Bradley at Auckland University on August 2nd, I realise how inadequate the internet can be for debate.
Thirdly, as Richard Dawkins said in his response to the Pope outrageous speech in Edinburgh, blaming atheism for Hitler, one can’t help feeling that the gloves are off. So, to say the least, I was more than a little angry when I posted. Which, of course, can influence your perspective.
Finally, I have been giving a lot of thought to what was said and the associated evidence posted by both sides. I’ve reposted the second quote that Ropata posted from the Conservative Colloqium site:
“Hitler was NOT a Christian. He hated Christianity. If he made any public remarks in support of Christianity, that was because he was in public and would lie or obfuscate to appease a crowd at times. Hitler was opposed to atheism because he was a spiritual man: “atheism… is a return to the state of the animal…” (Hitler’s Table Talk, pg 59). But opposition to atheism doesn’t make anyone a Christian. Nazism was his religion, an authentic religion of his own creation.
Re-reading it and others, I’m inclined to think that he was not an atheist or a christian, he was just what you would imagine him to be, an extremely manipulative, politician who used whatever means he needed to to gain ultimate power.
What is telling, with regard to that is: “an authentic religion of his own creation”.

So, given all that, I’m personally still in favour of a humanist/rationalist approach to life, that is extremely sceptical of organised religion in any form.

10 comment(s):

Paul Bennett said...

Lucia Maria,

Firstly, thanks for re-posting my comments on your blog, I really appreciate it.

Secondly, as I commented to Matt Flannagan over on the M&M blog, after I’d seen him in real life debate Dr Raymond Bradley at Auckland University on August 2nd, I realise how inadequate the internet can be for debate.

Thirdly, as Richard Dawkins said in his response to the Pope outrageous speech in Edinburgh, blaming atheism for Hitler, one can’t help feeling that the gloves are off. So, to say the least, I was more than a little angry when I posted. Which, of course, can influence your perspective.

Finally, I have been giving a lot of thought to what was said and the associated evidence posted by both sides. I’ve reposted the second quote that Ropata posted from the Conservative Colloqium site:

“Hitler was NOT a Christian. He hated Christianity. If he made any public remarks in support of Christianity, that was because he was in public and would lie or obfuscate to appease a crowd at times. Hitler was opposed to atheism because  he was a spiritual man: “atheism… is a return to the  state of the animal…” (Hitler’s Table Talk, pg 59). But opposition to atheism doesn’t make anyone a Christian. Nazism was his religion, an authentic religion of his own creation.

Re-reading it and others, I’m inclined to think that he was not an atheist or a christian, he was just what you would imagine him to be, an extremely manipulative, politician and dictator, who used whatever means he needed to to gain ultimate power.

What is telling, with regard to that is: “an authentic religion of his own creation”.

If, at the same time, you take the Japanese populations devotion to their country and Emperor Hirohito, to the extent that he was viewed as a “God” by some, so fueling their almost suicidal zeal when it came to military matters during World War 2.

Add to that, the pivotal role that Russia, led by an outright atheist, in the form of Joseph Stalin, played with regard to the defeat of Nazi Germany.

Then, I have to say, nothing is ever as cut and dried as it may first appear however much we would wish it to be.

This, in no way, is meant to excuse any of the atrocities committed by any of the countries, their people and ultimately their leaders, but ultimately humans were duped into following Hitler with his religiously packaged National Socialism, Hirohito as a “God” like figure and Stalin for communism with a clear atheistic stance.

So, given all that, I’m personally still in favour of a humanist/rationalist approach to life, that is extremely sceptical of organised religion in any form.

Paul Bennett said...

Lucia Maria,
Firstly, thanks for re-posting my comments on your blog, I really appreciate it.
Secondly, as I commented to Matt Flannagan over on the M&M blog, after I’d seen him in real life debate Dr Raymond Bradley at Auckland University on August 2nd, I realise how inadequate the internet can be for debate.
Thirdly, as Richard Dawkins said in his response to the Pope outrageous speech in Edinburgh, blaming atheism for Hitler, one can’t help feeling that the gloves are off. So, to say the least, I was more than a little angry when I posted. Which, of course, can influence your perspective.
Finally, I have been giving a lot of thought to what was said and the associated evidence posted by both sides. I’ve reposted the second quote that Ropata posted from the Conservative Colloqium site:
“Hitler was NOT a Christian. He hated Christianity. If he made any public remarks in support of Christianity, that was because he was in public and would lie or obfuscate to appease a crowd at times. Hitler was opposed to atheism because  he was a spiritual man: “atheism… is a return to the  state of the animal…” (Hitler’s Table Talk, pg 59). But opposition to atheism doesn’t make anyone a Christian. Nazism was his religion, an authentic religion of his own creation.
Re-reading it and others, I’m inclined to think that he was not an atheist or a christian, he was just what you would imagine him to be, an extremely manipulative, politician who used whatever means he needed to to gain ultimate power.
What is telling, with regard to that is: “an authentic religion of his own creation”.
If, at the same time, you take the Japanese populations devotion to their country and Emperor Hirohito, to the extent that he was viewed as a “God” by some, so fueling their almost suicidal zeal when it came to military matters during World War 2.
Add to that, the pivotal role that Russia, led by an outright atheist, in the form of Joseph Stalin, played with regard to the defeat of Nazi Germany.
Then, I have to say, nothing is ever as cut and dried as it may first appear however much we would wish it to be.
This, in no way, is meant to excuse any of the atrocities committed by any of the countries, their people and ultimately their leaders, but ultimately humans were duped into following Hitler with his religiously packaged National Socialism, Hirohito as a “God” like figure and Stalin for an atheistic stance.
So, given all that, I’m personally still in favour of a humanist/rationalist approach to life, that is extremely sceptical of organised religion in any form.

Paul Bennett said...

Lucia Maria,
Firstly, thanks for re-posting my comments on your blog, I really appreciate it.
Secondly, as I commented to Matt Flannagan over on the M&M blog, after I’d seen him in real life debate Dr Raymond Bradley at Auckland University on August 2nd, I realise how inadequate the internet can be for debate.
Thirdly, as Richard Dawkins said in his response to the Pope outrageous speech in Edinburgh, blaming atheism for Hitler, one can’t help feeling that the gloves are off. So, to say the least, I was more than a little angry when I posted. Which, of course, can influence your perspective.
Finally, I have been giving a lot of thought to what was said and the associated evidence posted by both sides. I’ve reposted the second quote that Ropata posted from the Conservative Colloqium site:
“Hitler was NOT a Christian. He hated Christianity. If he made any public remarks in support of Christianity, that was because he was in public and would lie or obfuscate to appease a crowd at times. Hitler was opposed to atheism because  he was a spiritual man: “atheism… is a return to the  state of the animal…” (Hitler’s Table Talk, pg 59). But opposition to atheism doesn’t make anyone a Christian. Nazism was his religion, an authentic religion of his own creation.
Re-reading it and others, I’m inclined to think that he was not an atheist or a christian, he was just what you would imagine him to be, an extremely manipulative, politician who used whatever means he needed to to gain ultimate power.
What is telling, with regard to that is: “an authentic religion of his own creation”.

So, given all that, I’m personally still in favour of a humanist/rationalist approach to life, that is extremely sceptical of organised religion in any form.

Lucia Maria said...

Hi Paul,

Not sure why your comments are being automatically deleted. Just making some enquiries right now, so hang back from posting until this gets sorted out.

I.M Fletcher said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
I.M Fletcher said...

Sorry if this gets posted twice ...

There are some more quotes from Hitlers Table Talk HERE which give me an entirely different impression from the quote you've shown - eg -


19th October, 1941:
The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity. Christianity is a prototype of Bolshevism: the mobilisation by the Jew of the masses of slaves with the object of undermining society

13th December, 1941:

Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery....
When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease….
I don't interfere in matters of belief. Therefore I can't allow churchmen to interfere with temporal affairs. The organised lie must be smashed. The State must remain the absolute master….


There are even more quotes like that.

leftrightout said...

Does that appology also extend to me? After all, I was accused of being some I am not as well.

I get it now Fletch; an atheist is someone who isn't a xian? Is that waht you're saying?

And one more for Sunday reflection - One more pedo priest exposed; one more accuser sidelined and excommunicated while pedo priest repatriated to Ireland to continue his evil ways.

*I* still don't think she's a saint, but she sure deserves a big pat on the back.

http://www.smh.com.au/national/mackillop-exposed-paedophile-priest-20100924-15qkt.html

Angus said...

"Does that appology also extend to me? After all, I was accused of being some I am not as well."

No. And you also post under multiple identities don't you Paul ?

LRO, Billy Borker, Fugley, MyNameIsJack to name a few.

P.S - Why do you walk with a limp ?

KG said...

"P.S - Why do you walk with a limp ?"

LOL!

Lucia Maria said...

LRO, I'm sorry, I do owe you an apology as well. This time.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.