 |
|
|
|
 Pope Francis graduated as a chemical technician before moving on to study philosophy, psychology and theology.
April 11th, 2013
03:13 PM ET
Vatican seeks to rebrand its relationship with scienceBy Florence Davey-Attlee, CNN (CNN) - Dropping to his knees before the 10 cardinals of the Inquisition, dressed in the white shirt of penitence, Galileo Galilei was forced to retract his "heretic" theory that the Earth moved around the Sun. Threatened with torture and interrogated for 18 days, the scientist, who was imprisoned in the 17th century, promised to never again teach the theory and spent the rest of his life under house arrest in his small farmhouse outside of Florence. Galileo's fate was very different from that of other scientists at the time of the Inquisition. Some were executed for threatening the church's teachings. Italian astronomer Giordano Bruno, an Italian philosopher who argued that the universe was infinite, was burned at the stake. Now in 2013, as Pope Francis settles into his new role as leader of the Catholic Church, the Vatican's head of science is urging a re-think of the "mischaracterization" of the relationship between the church and science. The Vatican would like the world to see how much this relationship has changed. FULL STORY
Next entry »A papal portrait ... made out of condoms
« Previous entrySoldier priest receives ultimate medal
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
One sect calls homosexuality an abomination while the next one (over 4,000,000 members) in the same denomination is already performing gay marriage.
One sect, the Westboro Baptist Church believes Americans are being killed at war because America is too kind to "fags".
One sect believes women to be subservient, while another sect in the same denomination promotes equality between the sexes.
One sect believes that Jesus and Satan were brothers and that Christ will return to Jerusalem AND Jackson County, Missouri.
Some believe the Pope is the Anti-Christ. Some believe Obama is the Anti-Christ.
Some believe that celibacy is the only option for certain people, or for people in certain positions. Many of the people from these same institutions advocate against abortion, but pretend not to understand the realistic benefit of the morning after pill or even basic contraception; their unrealistic wishful thinking is causing the death of many at the hands of disease.
In the U.S. recently we learned of the head of Lutheran CMS chastising a minister of that church for participating in a joint service for the victims of the Newtown school shooting.
Conflicted right from the very beginning, Christianity continues to splinter and create more extreme divisions as time goes by, constantly subjecting others in its crossfire.
Prayer changes things
Stalin, Hitler, Pol Pot, etc also changed things. What is your point?
If you perform a rain dance and it rains doesn't mean that your dance caused the rain. The same goes with "answered" prayers. Confusing correlations with causations represents one of the most common human errors of logic.
–Ignots Pistachio
If you pray for rain long enough, it eventually does fall. If you pray for floodwaters to
abate, they eventually do. The same happens in the absence of prayers.
–Steve Allen
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realized that the Lord doesn't work that way so I stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
–Emo Philips
A bunch of pederast cultists is what they're all are.
Try again, anon. But use English this time.
As an atheist, I am pleased to see a major Christian religion trying to comport with science. They even have tried to be as consistent as they can with Evolution. This indicates a recognition that much of science and religion should cover different ground. Religion should stay out of how nature works, science stays out of supernatural realms (which it already does).
"science stays out of supernatural realms (which it already does)."
Science stays out of the "supernatural" realm because the "supernatural" realm does not exist.
"Mat 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
We shall allow these strange celibate men to dine on the fruits of human knowledge, what we crawled through the wire risking capture, torture and worse to wring free from the Serpent of ignorance, knowing that they would have burned us for our efforts not so long ago. We will watch them gorge themselves on it, the pulp of our work running down their chins, doughy little hands scooping it up faster than we can put it in front of them. We may not see gratitude in their piggy eyes, or even the tiniest signs that we have helped them change for better or for worse. But we WILL hear them say "please".
@ The real tom, @Rick John Lennox is ok. I'm just at odds with Atheists that they cannot be certain of their belief of no God. Stubborn, pig headed I think. Verbal Masturbation?? Interesting view, but highly doubt what I have to say is self gratifying yet completely useless?? I'm all ears...if you would like to enlighten me.
@Kilto
I addressed your misunderstanding of what atheism is already today. You also posted after on the same thread, so I know that you had the opportunity to read it. Did you just decide not to, or did you read it, and decide that you want to stick with what you want atheism to mean?
@Kilto,
"I'm just at odds with Atheists that they cannot be certain of their belief of no God."
It's easy to demonstrate an example.
I don't believe in flying pink unicorns. I cannot prove that there is no such thing. Maybe there are flying pink unicorns in a secret valley no one has found. Maybe they live on another planet.
You can't prove non-existence.
I don't believe in God. I can't prove it and don't need to.
Plus, and this is important.
These statements:
1. I believe God does not exist.
2. I don't believe in God.
Are different.
You really are dumb as a plant, aren't you, Kilturd?
"Enlighten" you? Not even remotely worth the effort when you can't manage to figure out how the rules of capitalization work, dumbfvck.
Go buy a clue.
Kilto
Again, nobody can be absolutely certain that vampires don't exist, but that doesn't warrant wearing a necklace of garlic 24/7, does it? Nobody can be absolutely certain that werewolves don't exist, but that doesn't warrant carrying a gun loaded with silver bullets 24/7, does it? There are thousands of ever so slightly possible threats that almost nobody even thinks about seriously which are just as likely as meeting your God after I die, in my opinion. As things stand right now there are lots of people right here in the USA who are actually preparing for the Zombie Apocalypse which they see as inevitable. Are you worried about it? Me neither, for the same reason why I'm not worried about ever meeting your God.
I have a very special relationship with my cats. It's not the usual predator-prey one although there is that aspect to it.
How's that camel-toe?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT66xof5NcY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=9dTAaq1xdTQ
What a load of cow manure...didn't disprove anything.
Kilto
No need to disprove anything; you just need to find enough reasons not to take the claim that God exists seriously, that's all. Reasonable doubt. I have sufficient reasonable doubt in the existence of God not to believe that he actually exists. The people who claim that he exists don't have a strong enough case to convince me. See how it works?
Did ouma use the trackpad to scroll thru the vid in less than 10 minutes?!?!
Reasonable doubt like say in a court of law...First thing...Faith is unquestionably the most important part of any belief system, be it Christian, Muslim, Jew or atheist. I think the existence of God is obvious and that a truly reasonable person cannot escape the conclusion that he exists, that Christ's exists, that Christ rose from the grave, etc. then again that is self evident to me. God does not exist, that is like saying "Existence does not exist. I would bring up Pascal's wager but that would not be enough. You can believe in God but that does not guarantee when you die you get into Heaven to spend eternity. You also need to accept God's terms dealing with salvation.
Oh, really, Kilto, you are just too silly for words. There's no doctrine or faith involved in atheism. And there's no evidence at all that a god exists.
If you had any, you'd present it. All you do is commit verbal mastur bation.
Kilton
Do you know who John Lennox is?
@Rick,
I'm thinking not.
Kilto is frantically trying to Google the name and figure out why it matters.
Kilto=fvcktard.
Kilto
Faith has nothing to do with the atheist position that God most likely doesn't exist. Do you need faith to believe that you'll probably never see a real leprechaun? God is obvious to you in the same way that the ancient Greeks saw their gods in everything and Native Americans believed that everything had a spirit. You were all taught to see the world this way, right?
If you want to take Pascal's Wager seriously then you have to be equally concerned about potentially meeting any of the gods of the underworld after you die. Nobody ever proved that these gods didn't exist; they just became unpopular. What do you do then? Do you take measures to try appeasing all of them? They're all pretty jealous, so that wouldn't work. You might fool some of the non-omniscient ones into thinking that you sincerely believe in them, but anyone taking up the Wager wouldn't be able to fool an omniscient god. There's also no way of forcing yourself to believe in something that you know ain't true. Mark Twain said that was the definition of "faith".
The Wager also fails to mention the price of believing in God. God's terms could run into becoming bigoted against certain groups that any reasonable person without religion probably wouldn't. They could mean paying in a huge chunk of your income to causes that you frankly do not agree with. They could mean limiting most of your life to activities sanctioned by your church. All of your activities, for some. That is basically paying your entire existence over to this Wager, for a chance at cheating death because you are afraid. Sorry, but life is too short to be spending most of it worrying about it ending. I'd rather just live.
Yes, of course I am supposed to take this seriously.
Walking around in a dress and a pointy hat with six a foot golden popestick.
He looks like Gandalf in drag.
I wonder exactly how they plan to scientifically argue for a snake with the ability to talk, a woman magically made from a mans rib, and a three day dead rotting corpse magically springing back to life.
Yeah, god uses science.
Laughable.
"With the new pope being himself a trained scientist - Francis graduated as a chemical technician before moving on to study philosophy, psychology and theology"
Looks like Pope Francis is highly accomplished in various academic fields of study. Wow!!!
This is another one of those like, who cares? Well only catholics and some scientists may care. IDOLATRY is a SIN, IDOLATRY is Not Religion.
Points taken away for Random Capitalization.
And You are who?
I wonder whether some protestants don't hold the Bible to be some kind of idol as well? It's almost as though they worship it instead of God.
A lot of scientists can also be religious, but that's like observing that a lot of doctors can also be smokers. Just because they're smokers doesn't mean that they have proven to themselves that smoking is actually good for people. People often do things that they know they can't defend to others. Just because a scientist personally believes in God doesn't mean that he has a scientific reason for doing so.
Oops, that was for Curious below.
Why must one have a scientific reason for believing in God?
For that matter, please define "scientific reason."
@A Con...yes, I suppose that needs to be addressed first...what do you mean by "a scientific reason"?
"Why must one have a scientific reason for believing in God?"
Why must one have a scientific reason to believe in Leprechauns?
Gullibilty is best accomplished without it.
O.k. Blessed–define "a scientific reason."
Being able to demonstrat and replicate causation of the claim.
Curious
"Why must one have a scientific reason for believing in God?"
You don't, but I personally find the actual reasons why believers say they know God exists not very convincing. Lots of people swear that astrology works, and they use it to guide their lives to a certain extent, but I don't find their reasons for believing in it very compelling. There are plenty of good scientific reasons why the influence of stars billions of miles away shouldn't affect our lives. That's why I still remember what "sign" I am, but I don't follow astrology in any way.
Larry...two questions...(1) what reasons have you been given, and why are they not persuasive (o.k. 3 questions; (2) whay evidence (outside of the scientific method) would you find persuasive. I say outside of the scientific method, because, as i've stated before, the SM is designed to study the supernatural.
sorry, that's "what evidence," not "whay evidence"
Curious,
Why do you think anything supernatural is real? How can one know anything about the supernatural if it can't be studied? Name one thing that a religion was able to prove true WITHOUT using science?
The bottom line is if you can't demonstrat your claims why do you believe them and more importantly why should I?
Curious
I've been around for a long time. Been retired a long time. I've probably heard every Christian reason there is to believe in God. They use to impress me, but I took the step of checking into these claims and none of them pan out as reliable. People are just too wiling to believe on face value what their preachers tell them, and few ever bother to actually check if what he's saying is accurate.
If we're talking about real things and not philosophical ideas such as "God is Love", or "Having a relationship with Christ" then scientific methods are all that I trust. What would you consider a good method of studying what you call the "supernatural"? Eyewitness accounts and testimonials?
Larry, you didn't really tell me anything with your last post other than "I've heard it all before." What is "it." What have heard that use to impress you, but no longer? Those things may (or might not) be important to me, but I won't waste your time giving you information that you are already prepared to dismiss out of hand.
Curious
I could waste my time also by listing every Christian angle I've ever heard. If you think you have something new, the please share it.There are good reasons why I dismiss Christian arguments so, if you do, I promise that I won't dismiss it out of hand.
I'm curious what those of you who think all believers have an inclined rejection of science think of Roger Bacon who is generally credited with the first to promote inductive reasoning as part of the scientific method. I ask, because he's quoted has saying: "It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man’s mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion; for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate, and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity."
Do you think it might be possible that many Christians actually accept science, but in the same breath believe that science, an in particular the scientific method was never designed to properly study the super natural.
It's not that religious people reject science, per se, it's the religious people that reject science that exposes certain beliefs to be wrong...
Like this Curious ?
Atheist Prof. Peter Higgs: Stop calling Higgs boson the ‘God particle’
Professor Peter Higgs said recently that there is no God and so people should stop referring to the theoretical partial that bears his name as the “God particle.”
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/04/08/atheist-prof-peter-higgs-stop-calling-higgs-bosen-the-god-particle/
Mrs. Pepperpot...a very articulate response. Now, if you will allow me, apart from the creation/evolution debate, what other current religious beliefs have been exposed by science as false, as you might put it?
@Science...I apologize for being dense here...how does your post respond to mine?
@Curious
"Do you think it might be possible that many Christians actually accept science, but in the same breath believe that science, an in particular the scientific method was never designed to properly study the super natural.
Of course they do. But 46% of Americans still believe that humans were created less than 10,000 years ago.
There are an awful lot of Christians (approximately 46 out of 75) who don't accept science – at least as it pertains to the origins of humans. Many of those Christians who do accept evolution as science are Catholics.
Not only is it possible, but many christians believe that. I don't think it's that uncommon a viewpoint. The issue is definition and description of what is "supernatural." If it can't be defined in concrete descriptions formulated by the scientific method, then it's all just mystical, personal experience–and if that's the case, then the honest believer has no business telling another person what is or is not right, wrong, god, devil, good, bad, whatever, because no one can ever way in on another's opinion of what is divine allowance. The scientific method delivers undeniable descriptions, but conversely, the path of personal mysticism only provides deniable precepts.
You may accept that all beliefs are perfectly equal and valid or that the scientific method provides the proper scale on which to weigh their merits, but there is no in between.
Curious
Science doesn't even know that there is a supernatural out there to study. As far as we know through science there is only the natural, and the products of the natural. Anything new that we discover that doesn't fit the natural laws as we know them simply means that we have to expand those laws. If we discover that ghosts are real, for example, that would just mean that there's now something new in the natural world that we can study.
@Curious,
here is some data on that topic:
Pew Forum 2009
% who agree that evolution is the best explanation for the origins of human life on earth
Total US population …..... 48%
Buddhist ............................ 81%
Hindu ................................. 80%
Jewish ............................... 77%
Unaffiliated ....................... 72%
Catholic ............................. 58%
Orthodox ............................ 54%
Mainline Protestant ......... 51%
Muslim .............................. 45%
Historically black ............. 38%
Evangelical Protestant ... 24%
Mormon ............................. 22%
Jehovah’s Witness ......... 08%
American Muslims are twice as likely to accept evolution as Evangelicals.
It is the particle that creates mass for the ass ! No God needed to create US
@Curious,
I don't have many issues with scientists who believe, just as long as they don't claim that science is the reason they believe.
Moby and Larry...interesting responses to say the least. If I'm reading you correctly, if the scientific method can't be used, it doesn't exist (unless it is part of the natural world, per Larry). Moby, your argument is the most confusing to me: what process did you go through to prove God does not exist.
Hey Larry science can create ghosts now .................with new tech....article on sciencedaily .com
@Curious,
"what process did you go through to prove God does not exist."
No proof is required not to believe.
What process did you go throught to prove that Santa Claus / the tooth fairy / Zeus does not exist?
@Curious,
I can't speak for @Larry, but it appears that he is just stating that science does not / can not address the question of god(s) as that would be outside the realm / magisterium (sp?) of science.
Logic, reasoning and education.
If the supernatural can't be studied what reason would there be to think it even exists?
Curious
How would we ever know that something actually exists if we can't somehow test whether it does, or not?
Do you believe in vampires? If not, did you have to prove that vampires aren't real? Nobody can be absolutely sure that there aren't any vampires, somewhere, hidden from scientific detection, but most people have concluded that there is more than enough reasonable doubt in their existence to forgo going around with a garlic necklace on, you know, just in case.
I judge that the case for there being a God is so poor that there is more than enough reasonable doubt in my mind to worry about him being real. You could flip Pascal's Wager at me but, to be perfectly safe, I'd have to make sure that I didn't offend any potential god, and I can't see being able to do that. Besides, nobody can just switch on belief in something. I have no good reason to believe in a God, so I can't just decide to change my mind as though this doesn't matter.
Science
Not many people would deny that the people who see ghosts aren't experiencing something, right? We just disagree on their conclusion that it's the spirits of the dead.
Larry
OOPS the Created ghost illusion ....................dead = depleted carbon ......spirits = moonshine/whiskery
"American Muslims are twice as likely to accept evolution as Evangelicals."
But what are the cold hard numbers? I bet more Evangelicals accept evolution than American Muslims.
Doing some quickie math, there should be roughly 17.5 million evangelicals that accept evolution in the US. While only around 3.5 million Muslims in the US accept evolution.
Maybe the RCC can bring itself into the 21st century by studying the effects of helping disease control via condoms and the pathology of gay people.
Nah. Goes against their religion.
The Catholic church is not nearly so anti-science as Protestant evangelical fundamentalism in the United States.
They have had some rough patches – Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Giordano Bruno etc
Can religion and science be friends? Hmmm, let's see.
Science – Hello Religion, I'm science. I'm about 3,000 years old.
Religion – Hello Science, I'm older than you. As far as we can tell, I go back about 40,000 years or more. There is even evidence that Neanderthals practiced me.
Science – Really!! How do we know that, Religion?
Religion – Because of you.
Science – So, Religion, what do you do?
Religion – Well, in the USA, I give comfort to not very smart people by letting them think that a being powerful enough to create the entire Universe and its billions of galaxies will cause them to live happily ever after in heaven after they die if they follow some rules laid down by ignorant farmers and herders in the Middle East some 2,000 years ago.
Science – You're kidding me. They buy that?
Religion – You'd be surprised. Not only that, but in poorer, less educated parts of the World, I can actually convince people to hit themselves until they bleed, starve themselves, bob in front of a stone wall for hours on end, wade into filthy rivers and, in some cases, to kill other people or even themselves.
Science – Oh my goodness, I'm not sure I want to be your friend. Do you do any good?
Religion – I sell a lot of books. And what about you science, what do you do?
Science – I relieve pain and cure disease. I also extend lives, allow travel, communication, and people to understand and control their environment. I allow humans to explore outer space, the bottom of the oceans and subatomic particles. In short, I have allowed humans to live longer, more informed lives, and with a degree of knowledge and comfort once never dreamed of.
Religion – Wow, they buy that?
Science – No, of course not. Unlike you, I have to deliver. I cannot claim something and avoid skepticism by alleging that it only happens after you die, or that my claim is "beyond understanding" or otherwise exempt from critical analysis or proof.
Religion – That's gotta suck.
Science – You get used to it. Anyway, I need a friend I can rely on. One of substance, not dreams. One of proof, not spoof and one of intellectual discipline, not flakey promises. I don't think we can be friends. Please go away.
Religion – Now we both know that's not going to happen.
I've been an engineer for over three decades. I also have a degree in theology. A couple of patents, one pending. Ninety percent of science has nothing to say about religion. Most people genuflecting to science know very little about the subject. They merely have faith. Science cannot identify the ultimate good. How is it going to take us there?
@catholic engineer
And what makes you think that there is such thing as an "ultimate good". In fact, what does that even mean?
@catholic Engineer. By "ultimate god" I assume you mean your god, the Jewish Yahweh with Jesus and the Holy Spirit (whatever that is) tacked on to create the three piece sky-fairy you people bow down to? right?
I assume you don't mean Shiva, Vishnu,Brahma or the hundreds of other gods simple people have believed in over the years, right? Its all about you and your god, right?
Great post. I need to save it.
Brainwashing can be very powerful, repeat to yourself over and over again, gods and creation myths are just that myths, over and over again and your delusions may leave you, the power of the Flying Spaghetti Monster compels you. You could be the first excorcism credited to the FSM, have a beer.
RAmen
"I give comfort to not very smart people"
And that dear friends is where Colin fell off the wagon and began to preach.
Pastafairian- "Brainwashing can be very powerful"
Exactly..just look at how many people will spout off that they believe in evolution but will say we are decendants of monkeys. They are nothing but brainwashed sheep.
No one who understands evolution says we descended from monkeys.
A common primate ancestor, yes. Monkeys, no.
"No one who understands evolution says we descended from monkeys."
Exactly...that's why I called them sheep. They don't really know what they believe but by golly..they think they know.
Religious sheep, atheist sheep, science sheep....they can be everywhere.
I'm a geobiologist. I study the effects of changing environmental conditions on the growth and development of calcifying organisms. I've taken graduate coursework in evolutionary biology, macroevolution, and geochemistry, among other things. My work is published in peer-reviewed journals. I'm also a devout Catholic. Nothing I believe as a Catholic conflicts with what I've learned or researched as a scientist. Faith and reason can and do coexist.
"Faith and reason can and do exist" Bullsh.it. They are the North Pole and South Pole, night and day. You say you are a scientist. Try publishing a paper where any element of your hypothisis is built on faith as opposed to reason and see how far you get. Faith is nothing more than accepting a set of facts, e.g. the existence of the Judeo-Christian god, because we so want to believe it.
Well stiff sh.it. The real World is not like that., You cannot wish, hope or dream magic beings into existence. Grow up, you pathetic fuc.king nine-year-old. The stars were nut hung to spin in magestic black and white pagent around you. You are not immortal and no creator of the Universe cares about you. God you Christians are weak people.
Catholic engineer, you'd make a great preacher, with so much slippery oozing. Add even more grease to your hair and you can join my team and help me rake in even more MONEY from the gullible hordes.
Colin, you seem like a fundamentally unhappy and angry person. It is obvious that you have a gaping void in your life that Dawkins and Shermer aren't filling. You might want to broaden your horizons. In the meantime, you can sleep soundly knowing that your name will be in the next listing of "prayer intentions."
@ Catholic Engineer, why is it the default position of Christians that atheists cannot be happy without believing in sky faries? Thanks for the prayers. I'll run naked through a forest covered in chicken feathers to help you, too.
Colin, you need to work on your reasoning skills. I've met quite a few happy atheists, having been one myself for many years. I think *you* are unhappy, not atheists in general. Your posts are vitriolic, bigoted, and cynical. You come across as a bitter zealot. As far as the chicken feathers, you can wear whatever you feel suits your personality; chicken, turkey, crow, etc. It is still, despite your efforts, a free country. Cheers and enjoy your weekend.
In order for a relationship to exist, the corporation needs to dissolve. Then Science can flourish.
In the twentieth century, secular corporations and secular governments gave us the Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Chernobyl, Fukoshima, and the fear of Iran and North Korea. The church had no armies or secret police during that century.
Science is going to save us, right? In whose hands.
@Prime Numeber – it also gave us modern medicine, electricity, air travel and that computer you are typing on. Give me science 24-7-365. Leave the sky-fairies to the simpletons. As the bumper sticker on my car says "Science too hard for you, try Religion."
The "fear of Iran and North Korea" have NOTHING to do with secular corporations or secular government.
The first is the result of theocracy and the second autocracy.
PrimeNumber
I'd wager that almost all of the politicians and military people who decided to drop the A-Bombs on Ja.pan were Christians. Right now, we fear the religious state of Iran getting it's hands on nuclear weapons. The personality cu.lt of North Korea is far closer to a religion than it is atheism. Your examples are rather poor, overall.
"I'd wager that almost all of the politicians and military people who decided to drop the A-Bombs on Ja.pan were Christians."
Harry Truman certainly was.
"The church had no armies or secret police during that century"
I think you forgot about this guy.
"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison. To-day, after two thousand years, with deepest emotion I recognize more profoundly than ever before the fact that it was for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. As a Christian I have no duty to allow my self to be cheated, but I have the duty to be a fighter for truth and justice… And if there is anything which could demonstrate that we are acting rightly it is the distress that daily grows . For as a Christian I have also a duty to my own people."
Adolf Hitler
Hitler on the evening of 11th-12th July, 1941:
National Socialism and religion cannot exist together.... The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things.