The Final Solution

[Goonie]

We can move it to another forum if you want.

No, but if you post in creation/evolution do not be surprised by the number of people discussing evolution.

 

[Gene2memE]

I believe the purpose of the thread, explicitly stated or otherwise, was to paint evolution with the same colours as Social Darwism and the Nazi extermination of Jews and other 'non-desireables' that lead to the industrialised slaughter of 12 million people.

I believe that's a logical fallacy known as 'poisoning the well'. Its also completely wrong.

Social Darwinism was a mis-application of Darwin's ideas about species diversity, applied to sociology and politics to put a scientific veneer on late 19th century notions of racial superiority. Its about as applicable to actual biological evolution as six day creationism is to cosmology.

Social Darwism is not a valid application of thinking from evolutionary biology.

The OP asserts that there was a "repentance" by Christians over "any involvement that they had with Hitler and his regime", but provides no evidence for this. It then further states that "evolutionists" displayed no repentance for "their involvement in the final solution", again without any supporting evidence. Firstly, this is an apples to oranges comparison - one is the comparatively mild admonishment of involvement with Hitler/his regieme, the other is the extermination of six million Jews.

The subsequent discussion and debate through this thread raised a number of pertinent points:

Hitler, and much of his regime, were Christian or identified themselves as Christian. Few Christians would accept their actions as 'Christian', but it was the label that Hitler and his cronies applied to themselves. The were born into a Christian majority culture, and identified at the very least as cultural Christians. The certainly weren't going around labeling themselves Muslims, atheists or Buddhists.

The Nazi regime was directly in opposition to the teaching of evolutionary biology and the works of Darwin. It is very difficult then to credit Darwin's thinking with inspiring their actions towards other groups with different identifications, be they racial, sexual, religious or otherwise.

Hitler held certain creationist views, which directly contradicted thinking in evolutionary biology at the time.

Darwin may have been considered a racist by the standards of our time. Whether he was or not is irrelevant and has no bearing on the validity of his scientific hypotheses. His first book On the Origin of Species contains no mention of humans whatsoever.

 

[Strathos]

The certainly were going around labeling themselves Muslims, atheists or Buddhists.

You sure about that?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The topic is The Final Solution. There is a lot more that we could talk about other then just evolution. But the only thing the people on this forum seem to want to talk about is evolution. We covered that aspect of this topic quite a bit already.

You have consistently tried to link the Final Solution to evolution! How can you not see that?

 

[joshua 1 9]

No, but if you post in creation/evolution do not be surprised by the number of people discussing evolution.

You have consistently tried to link the Final Solution to evolution! How can you not see that?

As Goonie said: "if you post in creation/evolution do not be surprised by the number of people discussing evolution." Why does that surprise you? Whatever the topic on this forum it is usually going to end up a discussion on evolution.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

As Goonie said: "if you post in creation/evolution do not be surprised by the number of people discussing evolution." Why does that surprise you? Whatever the topic on this forum it is usually going to end up a discussion on evolution.

You posted a topic trying to link the Final Solution and the Holocaust to evolution.
Do you deny that this is what you have been doing? Yes or no?

 

[ecco]

This is what I wrote: "One aspect that never gets talked about is that there are people that consider the final solution to have some aspects of humanity or humanitarian." We did talk about that a little bit but no one really had much of a comment to make.

We talked about your absurd assertion that scientists in general and specifically scientists involved with evolution needed to show repentance for their involvement in the final solution.

We are told that two thirds of the "Jews" were killed in Europe as a part of the Nazi's final solution. ...
Where was the repentance with science? Where was the repentance with evolutionists for their involvement in the final solution?

So, we discuss one aspect of your OP and you complain that we didn't discuss a different aspect of your OP.

Perhaps, in future OP postings, you should state only one premise that you wish to discuss.

 

[Black Dog]

It (What Hitler said) has a lot of bearing as to how much the theory of evolution is true and how much it is error.

(Bold Italics mine)

Please provide your proof that what Hitler said has "a lot of bearing" on the truth of the TOE. Thanks.

 

[AV1611VET]

(Bold Italics mine)

Please provide your proof that what Hitler said has "a lot of bearing" on the truth of the TOE. Thanks.

You don't see a correlation between Darwin's, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, and Hitler's, My Struggles?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

You don't see a correlation between Darwin's, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, and Hitler's, My Struggles?

There is a pretty big difference.
Darwin's Origin of Species (to use it's actual title. 'The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life' is a subtitle) is biological scientific treaties, which Darwin wrote from observing the biological world around him.
Hitler's Mein Kampf is an autobiography, expressing his own personal and political viewpoints on Germany in the years following the First World War.

There is no correlation between the two books, in any way shape or form.

 

[joshua 1 9]

There is a pretty big difference.
Darwin's Origin of Species (to use it's actual title. 'The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life' is a subtitle) is biological scientific treaties, which Darwin wrote from observing the biological world around him.
Hitler's Mein Kampf is an autobiography, expressing his own personal and political viewpoints on Germany in the years following the First World War.

There is no correlation between the two books, in any way shape or form.

So they are both racist but there is no correlation or connection between their racism? How do you differentiate between one form of racism and another? I was exposed to racism once when I was in Hong Kong and the bus driver passed me by without stopping because I was white. The bus runs every 10 minutes there so it is no big deal, but still the idea of it is sort of strange. Although perhaps there is more racism on the part of the atheist for the creationist. Or even the creationist for the atheist. For example I do not think it would be a problem for me to burn books that would make no sense to a atheist. Like a Harry Potter book or something like that.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So they are both racist but there is no correlation or connection between their racism? How do you differentiate between one form of racism and another? (snipped irrelevant part)

How many times do I have to say this: The Origin of Species is not racist! It does not make a single comment about humans. It only talks about the (then observed) natural process of natural selection on animal species and how Darwin theorized that by that method life evolved in to the life we see now.
It makes ZERO comments on the racist views held in Victorian Britain at the time.

Hitler's Mein Kampf however has no shame in showing Hitler's antisemitic and racist views.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is no correlation between the two books, in any way shape or form.

Not even "under the hood," so to speak?

I believe both books were authored by the same person.

 

[Black Dog]

You don't see a correlation between Darwin's, The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, and Hitler's, My Struggles?

Darwin and Hitler could have declared that poppies are actually baby humans, and it wouldn't have made one iota's difference to the truth of the TOE.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Not even "under the hood," so to speak?

I believe both books were authored by the same person.

... No. They really weren't.
The Origin of Species talked about the natural world and opened up the world to the (at the time) groundbreaking idea that all life on the Earth is interrelated.
Mein Kampf was (very likely) intended to start a political movement to shape Germany, then Europe and the World in to Hitler's twisted dream of what the world should be like.

 

[Papias]

The topic is The Final Solution.

I'm constantly surprised that as Christians we would bring this up. Looking into what we actually know doesn't support the idea that Darwin was racist or that Darwin caused the Final Solution. Looking into the evidence only makes Christianity look bad, because Hitler said again and again that he was Christian, he had "God is with us" put on the Nazi belt buckles, and so on.

Hitler certainly did have a good relationship with the Christian church he was raised in. As others have mentioned, the Nazis and the Pope collaborated a lot both in maintaining the holocaust and in hiding the top Nazi’s after the end of the war. In addition, we have the words of Hitler himself, from his famous book Mein Kampf (pg 70):

Thus I believe today that I am acting according to the will of the almighty Creator: when I defend myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.​

Or, even more explicitly, Hitler made it very clear he was a Christian in this speech:

"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 myself 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.​

-12 April 1922 speech, Adolf Hitler, Oxford University Press, 1942

I doubt anyone would disagree that he held German heritage in high esteem. It is probably no coincidence that the most famous German religious leader of history, Martin Luther, wrote a whole book urging the violent suppression of the Jews. You can probably find it online it’s called “on the jews and their lies”.

Hitler was also clear about being a creationist:

Hitler outlawed Darwin's work http://www.library.arizona.edu/exhibits/burnedbooks/documents.htm#guidelines


He also wrote the following:

Where do we acquire the right to believe that man has not always been what he is now? The study of nature teaches us that, in the animal kingdom just as much as in the vegetable kingdom, variations have occurred. They've occurred within the species, but none of these variations has an importance comparable with that which separates man from the monkey — assuming that this transformation really took place (from the less reliable Table Talk)​

and:

Whoever would dare to raise a profane hand against that highest image of God among His creatures would sin against the bountiful Creator of this marvel and would collaborate in the expulsion from Paradise. Mein Kampf, vol. 2, chapter I.​

It was by the Will of God that men were made of a certain bodily shape, were given their natures and their faculties. Whoever destroys His work wages war against God's Creation and God's Will. Mein Kampf, vol 2, chapter X​

“iron law of Nature–which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind. ...Such mating [inter-breeding] contradicts the will of Nature towards the selective improvements of life in general. … The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker … This urge for the maintenance of the unmixed breed … prevails throughout the whole of the natural world … The fox remains always a fox, the goose remains a goose, and the tiger will retain the character of a tiger.”​

Mein Kampf, Chapter XI (pg 223 in many versions)
***********************************************
In Christ-

Papias

 

[AV1611VET]

Darwin and Hitler could have declared that poppies are actually baby humans, and it wouldn't have made one iota's difference to the truth of the TOE.

I know.

Haeckel demonstrated that.

Someone here even pointed out that, sans the fossil record, the ToE would still be a viable theory.

 

[AV1611VET]

Mein Kampf was (very likely) intended to start a political movement to shape Germany, then Europe and the World in to Hitler's twisted dream of what the world should be like.

Well he had plenty of scientists working for him, didn't he?

I wonder where he got that 'twisted dream' in the first place?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Well he had plenty of scientists working for him, didn't he?

I wonder where he got that 'twisted dream' in the first place?

*sigh*

Hitler got his antisemitic views from the environment he was raised in. Germany had been rife with antisemitic views since the Medieval period. Combined with the political and social climate created with the Great Depression and Germany's lose in the First World War, that created the perfect opportunity for Hitler to create a scapegoat in the Jewish population in Germany.
I don't really know where he got his views on the Aryan race from, but to claim that he got his views from scientists is just... downright stupid, to be blunt.

I have to ask: why do you feel the need to make out that all scientists are bad guys (and don't repeat your 'axiom' of "I hold scientists in higher regard that theologians")? It's not smart and it honestly just sounds horribly petty. I doubt you'd like if I claimed all Christians are evil because of the actions committed in the name of Christianity in the past.

 

[AV1611VET]

I have to ask: why do you feel the need to make out that all scientists are bad guys (and don't repeat your 'axiom' of "I hold scientists in higher regard that theologians")?

Because scientists need to be put in their place.

Left unchecked, they will eventually sterilize every jot & tittle of the Bible.

I know I'm fighting a losing battle ... like one poster here harps on the environment ... but it's a worthy endeavor to expose scientists as both good and evil.

In short, their tares are beginning to outgrow our wheat.