AMD: but obviously the characterization of him as being an ardent atheist/Darwinist is incorrect, that was not what he was selling his particular brand of crazy under. He said he thought he was doing the work of the Almighty Creator.
Neither was Stalin an embracer of Darwin’s theory. Teaching natural selection made you an enemy of the revolution in Stalin’s Soviet Russia
Spirited: There is a distinct lack of critical analysis in your claims, AMD.
Your reasoning is very shallow, confused and directed by willful ignorance and vanity.
Atheism is a term relative to who or what is disbelieved. Early Christians were labeled atheists because they disbelieved in pagan deities.
Evolutionary Materialists and New Age spiritists (pantheists) are both types of naturalism, which means that some aspect of creation is held to be the Supreme Reality and creator of all that is. For materialists, undivinized irrational matter and energy are the Supreme Reality; for New Agers it is divine Christ Consciousness, the Force, etc.
Hitler was an occult pagan. Even the liberal mouthpiece, NatGeo confirms this. When individuals such as Hegel and Hitler spoke of a God, like today’s New Agers, they were not speaking of the transcendant God the Father Almighty but instead of some blood and soil or pantheist conception....an immanent “one with nature” God-force conception.
The same holds true for Marx’s “historical necessity” conception-—a cleverly disguised immanent god-force notion.
Evolution, natural selection (predestination), time, chance, and determinism (fate) are also cleverly disguised immanent god-force conceptions.
The same holds true for America’s Progressives and Liberal Christians. All speak of god christ but their god and christ are immanent divinized force-conceptions.
It is your pride and ignorance that has you conflating true Christianity with naturalist conceptions. And how very strange, because by your “beliefs” you are a “blood and soil” neo-pagan.
It turns out that the Enlightenment’s “isms” have not taken their zealous followers to a new and better place but back to the past.
When Paul debated Epicurean and Stoic philosophers in the Greek aeropagus, he was in effect debating today’s evolutionary materialists and evolutionary New Agers. And like you, they scoffed, jeered, and scorned him. Doubtless they called him a liar and an atheist as well.
A very wise man once noted that there is nothing new in this world; what once was will be again. And so it is that Progressivism is really regressivism and its wings have taken you back to what once was.
I very much admire your replies. Thank you for posting.