Jul
27
2010
0

Nietzsche and the Jewish Menace to Civilization

The Jewish menace to civilization

It is necessary to look at some other ideas about the Jews expressed by Nietzsche in his book. For one thing, he stressed the racial toughness of the Jews: “Psychologically, the Jews are a people gifted with the very strongest vitality . . .” (24). The Jews have “the most profound national instinct, the most powerful national will to live, that has ever appeared on earth.” (27). Hitler had the same idea:

The mightiest counterpart to the Aryan is represented by the Jew. In hardly any people in the world is the instinct of self-preservation developed more strongly than in the so-called ‘chosen.’ Of this, the mere fact of the survival of this race may be considered the best proof. Where is the people which in the last two thousand years has been exposed to so slight changes of inner disposition, character, etc., as the Jewish people? What people, finally, has gone through greater upheavals than this one-and nevertheless issued from the mightiest catastrophes of mankind unchanged? What an infinitely tough will to live and preserve the species speaks from these facts! [Mein Kampf vol. I chapt. 11].

(more…)

Jul
27
2010
0

Nietzsche, Paul and the Emergence of Christianity

Paul and the emergence of Christianity

For Nietzsche, Christianity began with Paul. The rabbi Paul, whose Jewishness is stressed by Nietzsche (25)(23), wanted only power for himself (22). To gain power, he invented a false philosophy so as to bring people under his control. This was identical to the earlier methods and motives of the Jewish priests when they fabricated the Bible (26)(29). Paul’s rewriting of history to suit his own ends was a typically Jewish trick (24). In short, Paul was not only a Jew, he was “the Jew, the eternal Jew par excellence . . .” (58).

Paul then used his new doctrine to mobilize the losers, the failures, the people at the bottom, to bring down the Roman Empire. His motivation was resentment and hatred “against everything noble, joyous and high spirited on earth . . .” (43). Since Nietzsche uses the word “us” in that context, “against us,” it is clear (as if evidence were needed) that Nietzsche considered himself among the spiritually favored few—indeed, elitist contempt for common people is a recurring theme of the book. In other words, Paul and the Christians set out to destroy the Roman empire just because it represented real life. If Nietzsche considered the Christian destruction of Rome as revenge for the crucifixion of Christ, that is not stated in this particular book. (more…)

May
23
2010
2

Review from British Church Newspaper

This review is posted with permission from the British Church Newspaper.  If it ever becomes available online, we shall link to it.


The question of how a civilised and modern state in the heart of Europe could devise, organise and perpetrate a racial genocide of the scale and brutality of the Holocaust has, in the minds of many, defied rational analysis. Yet to simply disregard it as unthinkable or the work of a few psychopaths is intellectually unsound and deeply unsatisfactory. The Holocaust was not unthinkable for it was thought up by the Nazi elite and implemented by some of the most educated and sophisticated minds in Germany. The origins of the Holocaust and specifically of German antisemitism must be traceable at least in part to historical, cultural or philosophical influences.

In his book Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible, Joseph Keysor seeks to attack the notion that the path to Treblinka starts in the gospels and in the Pauline literature. The author shows the naivety of such a claim pointing to pre-Christian antisemitism, characterised by the Egyptian pharaohs and the machinations of the Amalekite Haman. Keysor also puts the alleged antisemitic passages of the New Testament within their axiomatically cultural, historical and undoubtedly theological context. Keysor also gives a much fairer analysis of the writings of Chrysostom and Luther. He is both moderate and thoughtful in his analysis. While not trying to justify their opinions on the Jews, he explains how in the light of their other writings, they would never have supported or condoned the treatment of the Jews under Nazi rule. In addition to this, the author draws an important distinction between nominal Christianity and Biblical Christianity showing a clear incongruence in Weimar and Nazi Germany. While his marginalising of Hitler’s popularity amongst the German people is perhaps slightly dubious, Keysor is balanced in his castigating of the church for its silence, acquiescence and toleration of many Nazi policies.

Keysor also discusses how historical factors alone cannot explain the plans and actions of the National Socialist regime. Only within a theological context of understanding man’s depravity and sinfulness can the true rationality of their crimes be explored in a meaningful way. This is couched within a discussion of the strong philosophical traditions of Germany, characterised by the likes of Kant, Wagner, Haeckel and Nietzsche. Strong evidence is put forward that these, rather than Christianity, form the basis of much of Nazi ideology.

Keysor’s book is thought-provoking in the extreme, extensively researched and referenced and written from a clearly intellectual, rather than polemical standpoint. It is a welcome addition to a wide and controversial historiography and is worthy of serious consideration.

Michael Gray

Mar
06
2010
0

Preface and Permissions

Preface to the second edition

Some changes have been made to the first edition. With the help of some constructive criticisms, as well as more research materials obtained from the States, I have been able to strengthen the bibliography and add more historical detail and accuracy to the work. Some of the Christian polemics have been deleted from the second part, which is after all more academic in nature (as well as from chapter 4). The sections on Luther, Bonhoeffer, Kant, Schopenhauer, and Wagner in particular have been added to and revised.

Whatever flaws there might be in the book—and no book on these topics will satisfy everyone—I am confident that the main points are unassailable. Biblical Christianity, as taught by Christ and the apostles, and as practiced by many sincere Christians over the centuries, has nothing whatever to do with modern secular hallucinations such as National Socialism or Communism. Criticisms which do not touch upon these points may be interesting and useful, but cannot I think be anything other than secondary.

Finally, it should be pointed out that this book is a work of Christian apologetics, not of secular academic scholarship. As such, it legitimately deals with aspects of the human experience beyond the confines of conventional studies of Hitler.

A word from the author about quotations:

Some of the sources used in this book are in the public domain. Some have been quoted with permission from the authors or publishers. I have relied on “fair use.” If any possessors of copyright feel I have transgressed the boundaries of fair use (I often use less than 100 words) they may contact the publisher and we will take necessary steps to rectify any perceived violation of copyright. I was unable after repeated attempts to locate the source of the internet translation of Mein Kampf.

Apr
01
2009
0

EXCERPT: Darwin, Evolution, Haeckel, Hitler and Mein Kampf

Excerpt from Chapter 8

So much of National Socialism can be found in the Folkish movement that it is not surprising two major studies have located the origins of Hitler’s ideology there. Viereck’s Meta-politics: The Roots of the Nazi Mind focuses on the ideas of Wagner. Mosse’s The Crisis of German Ideology: Intellectual Origins of the Third Reich focuses on broader intellectual trends and currents of which Wagner was only a representative. Viereck spends more time elaborating on the Folkish roots in romanticism, especially in philosophy, while Mosse concentrates more on the spread of Folkish ideas through German society in the 19th and early 20th centuries-but in spite of their differences, both studies have a lot in common. Taken together, they provide a significant part of the explanation for Hitler.

Neither Mosse nor Viereck pay much attention to Darwin, and neither of their books lists Darwin in the index. Viereck makes only one passing reference to “social Darwinism,” the belief that the Darwinian law of survival-of-the-fittest applied to people as well as to animals. Mosse devotes a few pages to social Darwinism and recognizes its importance, but asserts the fundamental incompatibility between National Socialism and Darwinism proper. He claims that the Darwinian concept of the origins of man was not acceptable to Nazi race theorists.[i] Not only (in Mosse’s view) was such a humiliating ancestry unsuitable to a race of superior beings destined to rule; it also required a common origin of all races-another blow to the Aryan ego.

It might seem, then, that Darwinism as Darwin taught it is of little relevance to our study-and those who believe that Darwinism is true and beneficial will find no difficulty in detaching it from National Socialism, which was false and harmful. Apart from this basic presupposition, they have a number of other reasonable points to make against the idea of a Hitler-Darwin connection. (more…)

Mar
12
2009
1

Sam Harris and A Dangerous Christianity- A Menace Himself

That the self-proclaimed advocates of secular tolerance might themselves be (like some theists) fully capable of killing for their beliefs is exemplified by the popular atheist author Sam Harris. In his book The End of Faith, he states that “Some propositions are so dangerous that it may even be ethical to kill people for believing them.”[i] This statement raised so many eyebrows, even among atheists, that Harris felt compelled to give an explanation on the internet.[ii] Since this attitude is directly related to the crimes of Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, and Mao, it merits some discussion.

Attempting to dispel criticisms of his remark, Harris first gives on the internet the relevant passage from The End of Faith. Then he concedes that he did not express himself as well as he might have-”Granted, I made the job of misinterpreting me easier than it might have been”-and goes on to claim that saying he wants to kill people for their ideas “remains a frank distortion of my views.” He explains:

When one asks why it would be ethical to drop a bomb on Osama bin Laden or Ayman Al Zawahiri, the answer cannot be, “because they have killed so many people in the past.” These men haven’t, to my knowledge, killed anyone personally. However, they are likely to get a lot of innocent people killed because of what they and their followers believe about jihad, martyrdom, the ascendancy of Islam, etc.

At this point we can breathe a sigh of relief-if he only wants to kill some terrorists then it’s alright-and Harris (who wears a white hat) can go back to his hobby of demonizing theists (who wear black hats). A closer examination of his explanation reveals, however, a couple of difficulties. (more…)

Feb
09
2009
0

Hitler and Eugenics, Dawkins and Boteach, Concepts of God

That Christianity teaches we are more than animals and far above a mere struggle for survival, and that Christianity is profoundly Jewish in its origins and outlook do not need to be documented. That Hitler wanted and needed the votes of millions of people who were either Christians or respectful of Christianity also does not need to be documented.

The belief in the animal nature of man explains some of the more bizarre and seemingly inexplicable aspects of the Holocaust. Hundreds of thousands or even millions of cattle or poultry can be legally and ethically slaughtered to prevent the spread of cattle disease or bird flu. If people are essentially animals, who-except a born weakling, a pacifist windbag, or someone who thoughtlessly parroted Jewish nonsense-would allow poetical ethical notions to interfere with the need to eliminate harmful human beings for the good of society? By the way, I could slaughter a hundred thousand chickens to prevent the spread of bird flu and then go home and enjoy a normal life with my family-and so could someone who rid the earth of some noxious and harmful subhumans.

Also, we breed better forms of cattle or horses, and there is nothing wrong with that. Himmler was being perfectly logical and reasonable in trying to breed better and more advanced types of humans-if, that is, people are essentially no more than animals as Darwinists claim. (more…)

Jan
30
2009
0

Excerpt from Chapter One: The Present Situation

Introduction

The present situation

Christianity is being attacked in America today as never before. On TV shows and in movies, in the news media, in academia, in best-selling books, etc., Christians are being increasingly portrayed as narrow-minded, intolerant, ignorant, hypocritical, and even evil. This goes beyond mere ridicule. The basic teachings of Christianity are being condemned to an extent previously unimagined in this country.

It is being increasingly said that Christianity has had a negative impact on America’s history and culture-not just because of abuses, but because of fundamental characteristics of the religion. It was the Christians, it is argued, who enslaved the blacks, exterminated the Indians, oppressed women, burdened people with guilt and denied them sexual freedom, and forced the gays to stay in the closet. (more…)

Jan
29
2009
--

Contact

Joe Keysor can be reached by email at keysor@hitlerandchristianity.com.

To contact the webmaster send and email to admin@hitlerandchristianity.com

Written by admin in: | Tags: ,
Jan
29
2009
--

Reviews

From Michael Gray at the British Church Newspaper:

Keysor’s book is thought-provoking in the extreme, extensively researched and referenced and written from a clearly intellectual, rather than polemical standpoint. It is a welcome addition to a wide and controversial historiography and is worthy of serious consideration. READ THE WHOLE REVIEW

From the Messianic Times:

On the face of it, the premise that Hitler was a practicing Christian seems to reside in the gutters of the same dark, dead-end road as eugenics, Holocaust denials, and The Protocols of Zion. The conclusion seems so absurd, that an entire tome dedicated to its dismantling feels like overkill. Unfortunately, a modicum of investigation shows that it is necessary to refute this notion.

In the last fifteen years or so, the idea that from birth to bunker, Hitler was a Christian, has gained enough traction as to be taken seriously in academic circles— so much so, that author Joe Keysor felt compelled to definitively counter this absurd misconception in his new book, Hitler, The Holocaust, and The Bible.  [Full review available only to subscribers.]

From Don Hank writing at the John Birch Society:

Keysor notes something that no other historians seem to have noticed despite the fastidious research into the Third Reich, namely, the salient effect of secular influences on Hitler and the major secularizing influence of modernist theology on biblical Christianity in Germany long before Hitler emerged. Keysor points out that the secular philosophers who influenced Hitler most were Kant, Fichte and Hegel, as well as certain others. But the Folkish tradition, “with its uniquely German interpretations of Darwinism, added immensely to the respectability of the movement” as “…articulated in the writings of the eminent German Darwinist Ernst Haeckel.”

Keysor writes that, while historians constantly point to supposed religious fanaticism (Crusades, Inquisition) as a dangerous ingredient in politics, no one points out that “the atrocities of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro and Pol Pot, are much more relevant to our own times and even some centuries ago, and much greater in terms of the numbers slain…” and yet they “are not held up as examples of the dangers inherent in trying to organize society by reason alone.”

From Sntjohnny.com:

Extensively researched with an immense bibliography to boast, Mr. Keysor’s book exhaustively mines the writings that Hitler himself cited as influential (if anyone care’s about Hitler as an authoritative source on the matter, of course) and writings that perhaps were not expressly cited but clearly reflected in Hitler’s ideology.

Mr. Keysor astutely observes, “Odd, that for so many people the 16th century and the 1st century had so much to do with the Holocaust, and the 19th century had nothing to do with it.” (pg 70)

This completely jibes with my assessment of the situation, too.

From Atheism is Dead (an exhaustive review!)

Overall, Joe Keysor’s “Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible” is a great read which combines the excitement of a thriller, the intellectual satisfaction of carefully considered historical information and logic, the dichotomous nature of polemics, along with an emotional roller coaster.

This is a very serious book on one of world history’s most serious subjects and yet, I have never laughed so often whilst reading such seriousness as Joe Keysor’s commonsensical approach exposed the sheer nakedness of the pseudo-skeptic propagandists time and time, and time and time again with a touch of gentle “irreverent” whit with an occasional touch of sarcasm.

Surely, it is an important contribution to the historical study of Adolf Hitler and Nazism, the discernment of polemics and propaganda, the sensitive nature of multi-cultural relationships, and the essential importance of treating the Bible and Christianity in a fair and hermeneutically appropriate manner.

From James Hannam at Quodilbeta:

I’m no specialist on the Nazis but luckily I know a man who is. My friend Edward Bartlett-Jones, while certainly no Nazi himself, does appear to know far more about them than might be considered healthy. Some say he has the score of Wagner’s Die Walküre embroidered into his bathrobe, others claim that he leaves copies of Nietzsche’s Also sprach Zarathustra in dentists’ waiting rooms. Needless to say, he lives in Berlin. He is also an agnostic and so I thought I should send him Keysor’s Hitler, the Holocaust and the Bible for an expert opinion. He replied,

Overall I think it’s a good book but it has a strong Christian bias. The research is commendably thorough and without going back through the original sources, I didn’t see anything that struck me as being taken out of context. There is a good summary of Hitler’s philosophy (p48-49) and anyone who still thinks Hitler was a Catholic should be persuaded otherwise by page 87. There is also a good explanation of what Hitler meant by “God” on pages 93 to 94.

From Chris writing at AtheismisDead:

In Joe Keysor’s well-timed book, “Hitler, the Holocaust, and the Bible,” the reader is taken into the intriguing but sobering worldview that drove the machinations of Hitler’s regime. The timing is right, because Joe Keysor recognizes that when Reductio ad Hitlerum arguments against Christianity are packaged in philosophical sophistry and served up by the disarming bespectacled professor, that it is time to call the bluff.

Powered by WordPress | Theme: Aeros 2.0 by TheBuckmaker.com. Web page Designed by Athanatos Christian Ministries. Input by Sntjohnny.com.