Hitler: Mad, genius, or both?

[ValentineKnight]

Member_of_STARS I could stand your argument till now but don't you dare call those who follow a religion stupid!You don't see us calling you stupid(even though I'm tempted to now, I won't ) and how do you know it's all lies?All so called "scientific truth" is based on theory anyway and can disproven/rewritten at anytime and had people do bad things in the name of it.So please for the love of God/Gaea/Godd ess explain to me just how exactly this is different from faith? and no Church/religion is no different from Goverment/the Justice system in the fact that both are human establishments with dark pasts and some questionable practices that Have admitted(even if it was grudgingly)when They were wrong in the past and are constantly reforming/changing that have people who still have faith in them regardless of all the above.

[BadWolfX]

Or Narcissists.

[Dan Corson]

No, you're thinking of Botanists.

[Mr. Spencer]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't Satanists worship themselves?

[Bertha]

Ok, take Satanists then, or Pagans. They worship the devil and his demons.

You obviously know nothing about Pagans. They do not worship the devil. I know many Pagans, and there are many books about it at the library where I work. Not a single one mentions the devil. And "true witches", which are practioners of Paganism/Wicca, do not worship the devil either. They worship nature. Do a little research before trying to say they are devil worshipers. Paganism is pre-Christian, so Satan doesn't exist to them.

I hate using Wiki, but even if you wiki Pagan, you get this:

There are also missinterpretations of Pagan being the same as Satanist(or one being Satanic) it is not however, Pagans and Satanists are very different, though some simmalarities may be this does not make them the same.

Christians called Pagans devil worshipers because they did not follow their beliefs. Any "similarity" is idiotic to say, because many religions share something with another. Christians, Jews, and Muslims, believe it or not, have the very same founding in their holy scriptures. Does that make them all the same? No.

[Member_of_STARS]

Well, you're getting way more into the 'is there a God' thing with this argument, really. But to say that the Church has not reformed is wrong. It truly has. Do I agree with it? No, I think it's wrong about many things. I ddon't even think Jesus existed, and he certainly wasn't the Messiah as far as I can tell. Does Vatican Section XIII, Iscariot, carry the assassination of pagans and heretics all over the world? Hell no. Do you often see your local priests setting fire to the local Wiccan Bookshop, wiccans and all? No? Well, I'm guessing it's not the same as it once was then.

What you're essentially arguing is that if everyone in the Catholic Church left and formed the Notcatholic Church, with all the same rules and rites as now, it would somehow be completely different to the one that came before. It isn't the Church that causes damage, it's the people.

I mean, hell, you could argue the exact same thing about the legal system. There have been corrupt people in the courts...lawyers, judges. And hey, people have been killed due to that corruption. So, therefore, the legal system itself is hideously corrupt and evil and must be destroyed, right? Instead of reformed into something more useful and more fair.

And yes, I know you said there was a difference between a religion and something humans have created, although from your point of view surely they're both the same. The only difference I can tell is that in theory God should control hos His word is spread. Since humans are given free will, which is apparently the difference between us and Angels (and yes, I know, it therefore makes no sense for Satan to be around...and I don't believe in him anyway) then he really can't (or won't) force people to do something, even if it means the Church recieves a bad name. If the theory is right then they get punished after they die but God won't stop them here.

No. Once again.

Whas has kept religions from being procecuted is people seeing them as divine and not human organizations, even though a lot of us dont make a difference between an organization of faith and an organization with an idea of how people should pay their taxes.

And it is the fact that the Church has commited those crimes in the first place, that makes every person who declares loyalty to their respective religion, responsible for acts both future and past. Because- if they believe in the divinity of the Church, then they are actively supporting the whole of it. And if they truly do believe in the copout of "mistakes of feeble men", then how can their religion be valid if those deeds, in the name of God (whatever the name he goes by), went unpunished.

The priests may not burn people today, but saying its all OK because "everything is changed now" is wrong, religion is still a part of our everyday life, as a weakness of character for others to exploit.

Yeah, you can apply to the logic all day long, saying "water under the bridge" and "Church today is different" and it does make sense. Except that its this very notion that proves how ridiculous Church is. And how stupid everyone is to stick with it. And that makes the whole concept invalid and in my eyes, if not evil, then certainly not noble either.

[nemesiswontdie]

yha the ones your thinking of are evil then im not gonna deny it

[missvalentine]

no satanist dont believe in the devil or god so thats not true. read into it

I looked it up and it turns out that like Christianity with Catholics and Protestants, Satanism has separate sects too.

There is Atheistic Satanism which is what your thinking off, and Theistic Satanism which is what I'm thinking off.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanists

Atheistic Satanists just worship themselves and stuff like you said, and don't believe in Satan or God.

Theistic Satanists however are the classic devil worshiper who do all sorts of evil stuff, they believe in Satan and worship him.

[Darkmoon]

What I was getting at was that theres a difference between an organization run by and for people and with all its human flaws. Religion is something else entirely. *Theres a God, who is above all and everyone, and considering that group of people is living and preaching on his behalf, the organization itsself should not be able to commit human attrocities. So how can there be a God if the organization is still standing, after being responsible for murdering millions of people? Everyone is turning a blind eye on its history, saying the Church has reformed, changed. Its still based on a lie, on massive brainwashing and control.

Basically, its easy to blame Hitler. But can you blame God? And if youre blaming "the Pope", youre admitting that the Church as an organization is just as wrong and invalid as the NZDP.

Well, you're getting way more into the 'is there a God' thing with this argument, really. But to say that the Church has not reformed is wrong. It truly has. Do I agree with it? No, I think it's wrong about many things. I ddon't even think Jesus existed, and he certainly wasn't the Messiah as far as I can tell. Does Vatican Section XIII, Iscariot, carry the assassination of pagans and heretics all over the world? Hell no. Do you often see your local priests setting fire to the local Wiccan Bookshop, wiccans and all? No? Well, I'm guessing it's not the same as it once was then.

What you're essentially arguing is that if everyone in the Catholic Church left and formed the Notcatholic Church, with all the same rules and rites as now, it would somehow be completely different to the one that came before. It isn't the Church that causes damage, it's the people.

I mean, hell, you could argue the exact same thing about the legal system. There have been corrupt people in the courts...lawyers, judges. And hey, people have been killed due to that corruption. So, therefore, the legal system itself is hideously corrupt and evil and must be destroyed, right? Instead of reformed into something more useful and more fair.

And yes, I know you said there was a difference between a religion and something humans have created, although from your point of view surely they're both the same. The only difference I can tell is that in theory God should control hos His word is spread. Since humans are given free will, which is apparently the difference between us and Angels (and yes, I know, it therefore makes no sense for Satan to be around...and I don't believe in him anyway) then he really can't (or won't) force people to do something, even if it means the Church recieves a bad name. If the theory is right then they get punished after they die but God won't stop them here.

[nemesiswontdie]

I heard differently, but i assumed they were called Satanists because they, you know, worshiped Satan. They probably worship themselves too though.

Also i think Witches worship Satan too.

no satanist dont believe in the devil or god so thats not true. read into it

[missvalentine]

sorry but thats not true. Satanist dont worship the devil they worship them selfs as being one selfs god (if i remember correctly,correct me if im wrong though)

I heard differently, but i assumed they were called Satanists because they, you know, worshiped Satan. They probably worship themselves too though.

Also i think Witches worship Satan too.

[nemesiswontdie]

Explain how it is not evil but is wrong.



Ok, take Satanists then, or Pagans. They worship the devil and his demons, The Devil is a malevolent force. Are you saying that Satan is not evil? I mean all he wants to do is burn all mankind forever.



.

sorry but thats not true. Satanist dont worship the devil they worship them selfs as being one selfs god (if i remember correctly,correct me if im wrong though)

[missvalentine]

missvalentine: About the sacrificing children, etc, being evil. It is not. Does it make it right? No, not at all. Not in humanity's point of view, at least. We are humans, and as humans, it's wrong.

Explain how it is not evil but is wrong.

Evil: having or exerting a malignant influence; "malevolent stars"; "a malefic force"

Wrong: contrary to conscience or morality or law; "it is wrong for the rich to take advantage of the poor"; "cheating is wrong"; "it is wrong to lie"

Ok, take Satanists then, or Pagans. They worship the devil and his demons, The Devil is a malevolent force. Are you saying that Satan is not evil? I mean all he wants to do is burn all mankind forever.

Darkmoon: I do not believe in evil. I do believe in wrong. Though I do not think what he did was either, it was a bit "unique", though.
Yes, I know I make no sense.

Wait, so your saying Hitler was not evil and was not wrong either. So you support that fact that he murdered people? Your saying Hitler was good? or right?

Precisely my point. I think Hitler was a genius in the terms of his propaganda techniques, like it or not, he contributed to the base of mass communication.

Yet, his actions and consequences are not short of a mad man. But I try to see Wesker's Flag point on what is evil. There's a shit load of people who are responsible for the death of thousands of human beings and are not considered evil. For example, the catholic church. Inquisition anyone?

I think the catholic church is evil. no offense if anyone here is catholic. Not all Catholics are evil but they were and there probably still are a few. I think the organization has been tainted by it's dark past.

[Member_of_STARS]

Yes, it can be compared to things in the past. Faith and religion still cause attrocities to happen today. Suicide bombers being one of the lovlier examples. However, to say the Catholic Church now is evil due to the deeds of the past is to say that Obama is evil because he killed a whole shitload of Native Americans. Sure, he didn't actually do it. It was the American Goverment a few hundred years back, before he was born. But now he controls the American Goverment and so is responsible for those crimes.

That's essentially what you're arguing here. That people born hundreds of years after an event, after an organization has realised it's mistakes and made sure they're corrected and won't happen again is still, now, responsible for crimes commited by different men and women years ago.

Or that I'm a killer, for that matter. I mean, a family member of mine killed someone about three hundred and fifrty years ago. If these things can be passed by something as tenuous as simply being a member of an organization can it be passed along by blood?

What I was getting at was that theres a difference between an organization run by and for people and with all its human flaws. Religion is something else entirely. *Theres a God, who is above all and everyone, and considering that group of people is living and preaching on his behalf, the organization itsself should not be able to commit human attrocities. So how can there be a God if the organization is still standing, after being responsible for murdering millions of people? Everyone is turning a blind eye on its history, saying the Church has reformed, changed. Its still based on a lie, on massive brainwashing and control.

Basically, its easy to blame Hitler. But can you blame God? And if youre blaming "the Pope", youre admitting that the Church as an organization is just as wrong and invalid as the NZDP.

[Corrin]

I hate this thread