You'll need to earn that like.
Heh, I wasn't fishing for one, I was thinking I could just hit one for a reply to your previous post.
OK, then you don't have an example of any atheist Nazis who caused the Holocaust. I will as you suggest check Mein Kampf, though, to see if Hitler said he was an atheist. Here's one quotation:
"Almighty Creator" is a title. Yes, it is a title for the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob found in the Bible, but other religions with a supreme deity who created the world (or universe) can use the same title for their deity.
That conduct included Hitler's causing the Holocaust. So it's wrong to say that Hitler was an avowed atheist or that he caused the Holocaust because he was an atheist. Now you know. If you continue to make that claim, then you are lying.
No, Hitler never stated he was an atheist that I am aware of. He had references to a "divine Providence" which, like "Almighty Creator", fit a large number of religious positions. However, judging the tree by its fruit, Hitler's version of socialism, like all socialist versions, claim the State as deity (ultimate authority)... or perhaps you could claim as the absolute prophet of the deity's will. He was obviously not Christian, nor pagan, nor generally into the occult, mainly because there are various comments in private recorded by his followers against them.
So, we could say that Hitler didn't technically fit the definition of atheist, perhaps an agnostic position would fit better with a deity that created and then didn't interfere anymore, well, maybe a few times for the Aryan race.
Socialism is an atheistic ideology (again, you can claim "agnostic" because a deity that created and ran, never to interfere anymore is kinda sorta a belief in a deity I guess, but it is functionally atheistic because there is no deity to answer to) with has the State in the position of the deity. This is why Jews, Bible believing Christians and various others who reject this secular belief are persecuted.
You may have a different understanding of "socialism" than I do, but if we understand it as the government owning and running welfare services, then socialism is practiced by virtually all developed nations including the US and European countries. Since capitalism only provides for the economic "winners," governments need to prevent abject poverty among the "losers" by taxing those with wealth and transferring that wealth to those who need vital resources like food and shelter.
Yes, many modern governments use socialistic methods as a means to secure power. They seek to secure control and power of all means of production and distribution of goods, while eliminating all means for their citizens (which they view as subjects) to revolt against tyranny.
Populism is an actual response to capitalism's excesses, but that does not require a strong central authoritarian government like socialism does. Of course, the problem with that is that there are competing definitions of what populism is and does.
Of course the New Testament doesn't command anything like the Holocaust, and I think most Jews realize that. However, many Jews and other people see that "one thing led to another" which is to say that over the centuries many Christians interpreted their own scriptures as anti-Jewish. One need not be an Einstein to see how that mindset could lead to persecution.
Agreed. We both agree that there is an anti-Semitic strain in teachings nominally based on "Christian" thought and one thing does lead to another. It is often easier to give a disaffected populace a target for their aggression and the Jews have often been selected, along with pushing a narrative based on the local majority religion that the Jews deserve it because of X.
Incorrect from a Christian perspective, but I've seen how the New Testament gets twisted that way.
Yes, and that's why many Christians have persecuted others and not just Jews by interpreting such passages as being against some classes of people.
Again, agreed. I can only submit that such teachings are not in line with the New Testament and teachings of Jesus while acknowledging that groups that claim to be Christian push such false teachings.
Both Christianity and Judaism have the doctrine of the remnant (the faithful few left among the sinful many who claim their faith).
You'll need to explain to Jews that the "untwisted Christian scripture" is no threat to them.
Yes, among those Jews that have that worry, it would be needed.
Stuart E. Rosenberg answers "yes" in his book The Christian Problem: A Jewish View. He credits the Pharisees for starting some of the earliest schools and universities, for example. Not bad for "blind fools," now is it?
The point would be about their interpretation and additions to the Torah, not their idiocy in matters secular. Jews are well entrenched in the 1/10 of 1% that accounts for all human progress. It is actually one of the better bits of (circumstantial) evidence that the Jews are still the chosen people of God.
The position would be that God (as Jesus the Messiah) was rebuking teachers and experts on the Torah for misinterpreting what God intended to teach in the Torah. Christianity has its own problems with that style of "Pharisee" teachers as far back as Paul.
