david f,
I am 70 years of age and have spoken to former head hunters who have visited my Church; and I have had the children and grandchildren of those involved in pay-back in West Papua and New Guinea live with me while studying in Australia. In fact one of the members - Figaro Sokio is of such a family he is now resident of Australia and attend my Church. If he or members of his family were to return to Papua are still sought by another tribal family for pay back because in the distant past an ancestor of his killed a member of the other tribe that has not been settled.

These highland boys could survive off the creatures of the land without western food or shelter.

Like many politicians before and since, Hitler got to power
by presenting himself as the type of leader to which the people would respond.

Nationalism and patriotism were important values of the day, and more acutely in a country that had been so demoralized after WW1.

Hitler gained leadership; and rapidly changed government to a dictatorship.

He accused the Jews of corrupting Christian teachings - he sought to destroy the Judeau-Christian ethic. For example, he believed in killing the weak and 'impure'; absolutely contrary to the teachings and life of Jesus and his followers.

Hitler's beliefs, policies and practices owed much more to his interpretation of Nietzsche than to any reading or knowledge of the Bible. He believed in survival of the strongest through domination and elimination of the less powerful in society.

For a long time he kept his expansionist and eugenic intentions low key. For years Churchill warned about Hitler and few listened. This is because much of what Hitler espoused was followed by people throughout Europe and even in the US. You will find that 'science' was being glorified at the same time; and there were many people advocating policies that babies and children with various birth defects should not be allowed to breed - some didn't want them to survive at all. There are some old documentary films of that period still around.

Again, Christianity was not the problem. It's what people do with the teachings that is problematic at times.

Btw - while Christian nations or individuals within them may be accused of all sorts of mayhem; bear in mind that it has been Christian nations that rose to quell evils - such as Hitler, slavery and the like.

I think this article by Paul E. Marek has become topical to this discussion:
http://thecomensality.com/avasay/?p=109
"Btw - while Christian nations or individuals within them may be accused of all sorts of mayhem; bear in mind that it has been Christian nations that rose to quell evils - such as Hitler, slavery and the like."
Almost all the Atlantic slavers were Christians. Christian countries have never shown any hesitation in going to war, and still don't. Rudd claims to be a devout Christian, and is still sending our children overseas to fight for American Imperialism -which is also being justified by Christianity.
Christianity has historically been 'anti science' as so many posters have pointed out; unfortunately, it still is. The statistics in the world's most powerful -and ostensibly, secular- nation suggest more than half do not accept evolution; an amazing proportion support Zionism, not only because Palestine was 'given' to the Jews (and taken away, and given, and taken away...) but because they believe Jesus will not return until such prophecies are fulfilled. These same people do not regard AGW or ecological responsibility to be a priority for the same reason.
Another reason why I am becoming anti theist. The business of "Heavenly Reward". Too many people seem to think the egregious inequalities and injustices of this world are unimportant. It's only what happens in the next world that matters.

Foxy

<< I'm merely human - and when the right buttons
are pushed - I react - often to my deep regret. >>

I hear you, lovely lady. And fully concur.

I agree that the masses of people back in the time of Leonardo were ignorant and uneducated; they only knew what the reigning powers told them. Had the church become aware of Leonardo's work and discoveries, he would've been dealt with by their authority. Of course the church could've had a more open view of science and approved and encouraged great thinkers such as Leonardo, Copernicus, Galileo and so on. But they didn't - to our loss, which impacts upon us even today with those who seriously believe in ID and other complete fabrications.

Yes, the war between science and religion continues; and I don't see why it has to remain this way. There are, as you know many wonderful Christians; both scientists or other valued professions who have no difficulties with combining the wonders of this universe to their religious beliefs - by taking the bible more as parable than as fact. What you make of people like Runner or Philo, I have to wonder. However, this is not a gossip column.

I too, am on my own spiritual journey. I call myself an atheist for lack of a suitable word. I am not agnostic, because I don't even believe in the possibility of a single deity. But (and it is a big BUT) well mine is actually rather small... sorry I can't be too serious for too long.

But I feel a connection to the world around me and beyond. I can walk outside and feel the trees, if one is quiet and there is no wind, I can hear them shift ever so slightly in the earth. I can sit in the grass and watch an echidna snuffle through the leaf litter completely unperturbed by my presence. I can go for walks and greet people and other animals. I am lucky that I seem to have a knack with animals, an immediate trust between us.

Contd

Contd

I can also look into the night sky and think how amazing it is, how fortunate that it is now I look into the sky and not 15 billion years into the future, because at the rate the universe is expanding, our milky way would be all that we see - the other galaxies having moved so far apart that we would never know they were ever out there.

There is so much we have to learn, so much we may never know. But I do know that formal religion is not needed to be ‘good’ nor is it needed to be ‘evil’.

However, where my button has been pushed (this is a result of reading Peter Sellick) is that any good which comes from, in this case, Christianity – the religion receives the kudos. But any evil is blamed on the individual. Put simply – this is a major cop-out. And I’m not buying it. Nor am I accepting the “it is only a few extremists”. There’s too many of them and they bring moderates along with them. Hence the circular arguments this thread is having regarding Hitler, the Crusades, whatever. These atrocities have all involved very ordinary people.

Would we still have ‘evil’ without religion? Of course, human beings are very flawed. Power is the great corrupter at the heart of evil, be it within religion or political ideology or any dogma that conveys to a person that they have a right to inflict their will on others – from the woman-hating rapist to the Jew-hating Nazi.

I don’t know what the answer is, apart from knowing that the more we learn about ourselves and the world around us and the more equitably humans are treated by all power structures, the better chance for everyone. The desire for power comes from feeling powerless – eliminate that, and we might have a chance.

Pynchme,

Your description of Hilter is reminiscent of Pope Gregory VII.

I wouldn’t under estimate the influence of Christianity of Hitler. From Main Kampf:

http://www.mtfreethinkers.org/essays_stories/religion/adolph_hitler.htm

Also, Christians advocated eugenics before Hitler can to power:

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=DrKgIIxCHVIC&pg=PA127&lpg=PA127&dq=christian+eugenics&source=bl&ots=Ch0jZrq6SF&sig=QgaLaAYvFUNvAXwOMlWgqB-Trto&hl=en&ei=FaSQSv-MLcbakAWIsrm7Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6#v=onepage&q=christian%20eugenics&f=false

Last century, while the far left was not tolerated, the far right was accepted by many. Edward VIII had extreme right wing leanings. Also, leading US industrialists, e.g., Henry Ford. Britain did not wish intervene over Germany’s domestic behaviour. Herein, Chamberlain asserted, “peace in our times”. Britain declared war against Germany over the latter’s invasion of Poland, not over Germany’s internal policies. Curiously, Britain allowed Poland to be annexed by Russia in 1945.

Hitler viewed the Western democracies as weak and held that one day these soft democracies would be threatened by Asia.
Agree. Churchill was a rare voice recognizing the perils of ignoring Hitler. One of the few instances, he was right. I think it fair to say that Churchill was every bit as nationalistic as Hitler.