Charges that Hitler was Pagan

[TheGrayWolf]

A channel on telegram accuses Hitler of being Anti-Christian and pro-Pagan, citing multiple sources, such as the Table Talks, Goebbels Diary, The Kersten Memoirs, and Albert Speer himself.

Not only are there major issues with all of these sources, the public record of his speeches, and laws and actions completely contradict this.

A standard quote from Hitler himself from the same table talks:

"Nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan." -Hitler's table talks, page 49

"We will not allow mystically-minded occult folk with a passion for exploring the secrets of the world beyond to steal into our movement. Such folk are not national socialists, but something else ."
- Adolf Hitler, Nuremberg (9/6/1938) (http://hitler.org/speeches/)

"For the same people who brandish scholarly imitations of old German tin swords, and wear a bearskin with bull's horns over their heads, preach for the present nothing but spiritual weapons, and run away as fast as they can from every communist blackjack!"
- Adolf Hitler, (Mein Kampf, Chapter 12)

Today Christians ... stand at the head of [this country]... I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit ... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past ... (few) years.
- Adolf Hitler, quoted in: The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872

The charges against him supposedly being Pagan and anti-Christian is used to demean and attack the character much in the same way they accuse the holocaust as being real.

Not only are the table talks riddled with issues, so is Goebbel's diary, and other sources.

These lies are just as controversial as the holocaust, and is used to justify anything else that they are accused of and has to be called out.

[Otium]

A channel on telegram accuses Hitler of being Anti-Christian and pro-Pagan, citing multiple sources, such as the Table Talks, Goebbels Diary, The Kersten Memoirs, and Albert Speer himself.

[...]

The charges against him supposedly being Pagan and anti-Christian is used to demean and attack the character much in the same way they accuse the holocaust as being real.

Not only are the table talks riddled with issues, so is Goebbel's diary, and other sources.

These lies are just as controversial as the holocaust, and is used to justify anything else that they are accused of and has to be called out.

Hitler was not a Christian and he was not a pagan. I will comment on the quotes you provided momentarily.

Speer was indeed a self serving megalomaniac, and his memoirs are not perfect (see Matthias Schmidt's 'Albert Speer: The End of a Myth') but you cannot dismiss all of his reminiscences. Common sense in reading any text is crucial to weeding out unfalsifiable conjecture and the truth. You need to compare multiple sources as well. So, be cautious with Speer, but even if you were to quote him I don't see how you could manufacture a narrative around Hitler being a pagan:

Why do we call the whole world's attention to the fact that we have no past? It isn't enough that the Romans were erecting great buildings when our forefathers were still living in mud huts; now Himmler is starting to dig up these villages of mud huts and enthusing over every potsherd and stone axe he finds. All we prove by that is that we were still throwing stone hatchets and crouching around open fires when Greece and Rome had already reached the highest stage of culture. We really should do our best to keep quiet about this past. Instead Himmler makes a great fuss about it all. The present-day Romans must be having a laugh at these relegations.

Adolf Hitler cited in: Albert Speer, Inside the Third Reich (Macmillan, 1970), Pp. 94-95.

Hitler was evidently not a Christian either as Speers subsequent pages show. For example Hitler supposedly said:

"You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"

Ibid., p. 96.

On the same page Speer did remark that:

Around 1937, when Hitler heard that at the instigation of the party and the SS vast numbers of his followers had left the church because it was obstinately opposing his plans, he nevertheless ordered his chief associates, above all Goering and Goebbels, to remain members of the church. He too would remain a member of the Catholic Church, he said, although he had no real attachment to it. And in fact he remained in the church until his suicide.

Ibid., p. 95-96.

Whether Speer is correct to say that Hitler remained 'in the Church' is up for debate. I would say that if you don't go to Church, and if you don't act according to the Christian faith, you're not really 'in the Church' - which means Hitler certainly wasn't. Hitler 'protected' the Church only from the radical Pagans like Himmler, Bormann, or Rosenberg who would've seen it destroyed entirely. Hitler understood that many Germans still relied on the Church and so he wouldn't destroy it, he was also influenced in this regard by considerations regarding his own mother, who he knew would be an avid Churchgoer:

Immersed in ‘Barbarossa,’ Hitler remained unaware that Martin Bormann was already waging open war on the Church. On one occasion Hitler said, ‘If my mother were still alive, she’d definitely be a churchgoer and I wouldn’t want to hinder her. On the contrary, you’ve got to respect the simple faith of the people.’ Hitler assured Goebbels and Rosenberg that he would not easily forgive the German church leaders their behaviour during this emergency. But until the war was won the Party must proceed slowly against the Church. On July 30, 1941, Bormann personally circularised all the gauleiters, on Hitler’s orders, instructing them to refrain from any persecution of the religious communities, since this would only divide the nation which Hitler had so arduously united.

David Irving, Hitler's War and the War Path (Focal Point Publications, Millennium Edition, 2002), Pp. 431. (PDF)

Hitler's motivation to temper attacks against the Church is therefore not a result of him being 'Christian', but his concern about maintaining unity among the German people. It'd be a grave mistake to misattribute views to Hitler that you haven't evaluated in their correct context.

Not only are there major issues with all of these sources, the public record of his speeches, and laws and actions completely contradict this.

Anyway. You say the Goebbels diary is riddled with issues. I mean, I don't think so, no issues with it have been proven, although there is understandably speculation about potential interference from the Soviet Union, but that seems less than likely.

---

A standard quote from Hitler himself from the same table talks:

"Nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan." -Hitler's table talks, page 49

This quote is taken out of context, Hitler, if you read the section in full is criticising the emphasis given to religious debate. He is therefore criticizing the people on both sides who would seek to become Christians, or Pagans:

It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology had ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. Nothing dies unless it is moribund. At that period the ancient world was divided between the systems of philosophy and the worship of idols. It's not desirable that the whole of humanity should be stultified—and the only way of getting rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.

A movement like ours mustn't let itself be drawn into metaphysical digressions. It must stick to the spirit of exact science. It's not the Party's function to be a counterfeit for religion.

Adolf Hitler, 14 October, 1941., Hitler's Table Talk 1941-1944: His Private Conversations (New York: Enigma Books, 2000), Pp. 61.

This entire, rather short conversation is highly illuminative of Hitler's nuanced thoughts regarding spirituality in general. He doesn't endorse Christianity, nor does he endorse Paganism. He believes that both primitive doctrines of worship are being replaced by scientific thought. However this does not mean Hitler supports Atheism, as he himself says:

An educated man retains the sense of the mysteries of nature and bows before the unknowable. An uneducated man, on the other hand, runs the risk of going over to atheism (which is a return to the state of the animal) as soon as he perceives that the State, in sheer opportunism, is making use of false ideas in the matter of religion, whilst in other fields it bases everything on pure science.

Ibid., p. 59.

I could go on and on quoting the whole section, but you should just read it for yourself. Hitler affirms the basis of National Socialism as being derived from nature, which is scientific, not mythical:

If, in the course of a thousand or two thousand years, science arrives at the necessity of renewing its points of view, that will not mean that science is a liar. Science cannot lie, for it's always striving, according to the momentary state of knowledge, to deduce what is true.

[...]

The man who lives in communion with nature necessarily finds himself in opposition to the Churches. And that's why they're heading for ruin—for science is bound to win.

[...]

I envisage the future, therefore, as follows : First of all, to each man his private creed. Superstition shall not lose its rights. The Party is sheltered from the danger of competing with the religions. These latter must simply be forbidden from interfering in future with temporal matters. From the tenderest age, education will be imparted in such a way that each child will know all that is important to the maintenance of the State. As for the men close to me, who, like me, have escaped from the clutches of dogma, I've no reason to fear that the Church will get its hooks on them.

Ibid., p. 61, 62.

You might wonder whether this conversation is genuine, personally I believe that it is. Albert Speer, independently of this Table Talk relates a similar conversation in his memoirs. For example, in this same conversation Hitler says:

I especially wouldn't want our movement to acquire a religious character and institute a form of worship. It would be appalling for me, and I would wish I'd never lived, if I were to end up in the skin of a Buddha!

Ibid., p. 61.

And from Speer:

Thus Hitler had little sympathy with Himmler in his mythologizing of the SS.

What nonsense! Here we have at last reached an age that has left all mysticism behind it, and now he wants to start that all over again. We might just as well have stayed with the church. At least it had tradition. To think that I may some day be turned into an SS saint! Can you imagine it? I would turn over in my grave. . . .

Speer, Third Reich, op cit., p. 94.

The Table Talk quotation only has Himmler listed as a guest, not Speer, but nonetheless, whether these are two different occasions or the same one, Hitler most certainly expressed consistent religious/spiritual sentiments.

All doubt can be expelled on this, because Goebbels also confirmed that Hitler said this, as he writes in his diary on December 28, 1939:

The Führer is passionately opposed to playing the role of the founder of a religion. He does not want to become a Buddha later on. He is only and exclusively a politician. The best way to deal with the churches is to pretend to be a more positive Christian. So, for the time being, it is important to maintain a reserve in these matters and to coldly stifle the churches where they become impudent and interfere in state matters.

December 28, 1939; Elke Fröhlich (ed.), Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels, Part 1, Vol. 7 (Munich: K.G. Sauer Verlag, 1998), p. 248.

---

The quote about the occult is fine, there's no need to comment on it. It's true that Hitler didn't like the influence of the Occult, but this didn't mean he endorsed Christianity.

Next you quote from Mein Kampf no doubt an inferior translation, but no matter:

"For the same people who brandish scholarly imitations of old German tin swords, and wear a bearskin with bull's horns over their heads, preach for the present nothing but spiritual weapons, and run away as fast as they can from every communist blackjack!"
- Adolf Hitler, (Mein Kampf, Chapter 12)

This quote is also taken out of context. If you read the full chapter Hitler is criticizing 'Volkish' larpers, who are Pagan, but that's not the same as criticizing Paganism. Hitler is addressing an attitude of a certain group of people, and ridiculing their inconsistencies. Hitler derides these 'folk-lore comedians' for being unproductive in the face of Jewish power. Hitler says in the same section:

Among those people, it's often hard to distinguish between those who are merely stupid and incompetent, and those who have a definite rationale. My impression, especially with the so-called religious reformers based on ancient Germanic customs, is that they are sent by those who don't wish to see a national revival of our people. Their whole activity leads people away from the common struggle against the common enemy, the Jew.

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf Volume 1: A Reckoning (New English Translation by Thomas Dalton, Clemens & Blair, 2018), Pp. 357.

Hitler follows up immediately after by characteristically chastising those who would waste a peoples time on 'religious controversies':

This causes people to waste their strength on senseless and ruinous religious controversies. These are the grounds for an authoritative and dominant centralizing force in the movement. Only in this way can it counteract the activity of such ruinous elements. And that's why these folklore wandering Jews are so hostile to any movement whose members are firmly united under one leader and one discipline. They hate such a movement because it's capable of putting a stop to their mischief.

Ibid.

Both sides of this religious argument fail to comprehend Hitler's ultimate point, which is that when going up against a monolithic enemy, infighting about religion is a waste of time. Either get behind National Socialism or go away. Religion should always come second and not interfere with the forces that promulgate the life of the people and their right to existence.

---

This next quote simply cannot be found at the page numbers cited.

Today Christians ... stand at the head of [this country]... I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit ... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess during the past ... (few) years.
- Adolf Hitler, quoted in: The Speeches of Adolf Hitler, 1922-1939, Vol. 1 (London, Oxford University Press, 1942), pg. 871-872

Here are scans of the relevant pages from Baynes:

Norman H. Baynes, The Speeches of Adolf Hitler April 1922 - August 1939: Volume 1 (Oxford University Press, 1942), Pp. 871-872.

As you can see, this quote is not present on these pages.

---

If you're interested in what Hitler's spiritual beliefs were, I would recommend you read Richard Weikart's book:

Hitler's Religion by Richard Weikart
(PDF): https://archive.org/details/richard-weikart-hitlers-religion

Book Description: For a man whom history can never forget, Adolf Hitler remains a persistent mystery on one front--his religious faith. Atheists tend to insist Hitler was a devout Christian. Christians counter that he was an atheist. And still others suggest that he was a practicing member of the occult. None of these theories are true, says historian Richard Weikart. Delving more deeply into the question of Hitler's religious faith than any researcher to date, Weikart reveals the startling and fascinating truth about the most hated man of the 20th century: Adolf Hitler was a pantheist who believed nature was God. In Hitler's Religion, Weikart explains how the laws of nature became Hitler's only moral guide--how he became convinced he would serve God by annihilating supposedly inferior human beings and promoting the welfare and reproduction of the allegedly superior Aryans in accordance with racist forms of Darwinism prevalent at the time.

This is by far the most accurate understanding of Hitler's spirituality and therefore, of National Socialism which is a belief in the divinity of nature, and her natural laws. A cosmic order that spans the universe.

Weikart's book isn't perfect, he's an orthodox historian after all so he's needlessly hostile about his subject and epoch, but his overall conclusion is correct and firmly puts an end to the ridiculous religious debates concerning Hitler, and those who want to appropriate him into their own camps.

[TheGrayWolf]

My whole entire argument I had typed up didn't post for some reason.

I will submit just a small bit and return to it later as it is quite late here for me.

"This next quote simply cannot be found at the page numbers cited. "

This is not the correct quote, but I will show the full quote.

From page 240

In his speech in Stuttgart delivered on 15 February 1933
Hitler attacked Staatsprasident Bolz and the Centrum —
the Catholic Centre Party: the fourteen years, during
which the other parties had governed the State, had not
been years of happiness and blessedness but of unbroken
decline in all spheres. The Centrum claims that it has
attacked Bolshevism, but in fact it has gone arm in arm
with Marxism,

"In fourteen years the system which has now been
overthrown has piled mistake upon mistake, illusion
upon illusion. And that is also true of our foreign
policy. Only since the time when through our Move¬
ment the world has been shown that a new Germany of

resolution and resistance is arising—only since then are
we once more regarded with other eyes. If to-day in
Geneva a people fights side by side with us for the free¬
dom of Europe, it is we who have first formed this
friendship and not the representatives of the former
system,


*‘And now Staatsprasident Bolz says that Christianity
and the Catholic faith are threatened by us* And to that
charge I can answer; In the first place it is Christians
and not international atheists who now stand at the head
of Germany* I do not merely talk of Christianity, no, I
also profess that I will never ally myself with the parties
which destroy Christianity, If many wish to-day to take
threatened Christianity under their protection, where, I
would ask, was Christianity for them in these fourteen
years when they went arm in arm with atheism?”

‘*No, never and at no time was greater internal
damage done to Christianity than in these fourteen
years when a party, theoretically Christian, sat with those
who denied God in one and the same Government,”

*‘ Already on 14 September 1930 another possibility was
clearly open. But no, they could not, they did not wish
to separate themselves from the party-world of atheism*
We wish to fill our culture once more with the spirit of
Christianity—and not only in theory. No, we want to
burn out the symptoms of decomposition in literature,
in the theatre, in the Press—in a word in our whole
culture; we want to burn out this whole poison which
during these fourteen years has flowed into our life,”

As you can see, he did in fact say these things. I have my reservations for quoted people who not only turned their back on the Fuhrer, but who also survived the chopping block when so many others before them didn't, like Streicher, who was merely a cartoonist.

As for the table talks, see here https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880

[Otium]

As you can see, he did in fact say these things.

Not exactly. Whatever happened here, this is most undoubtedly not what Hitler said. I'd say the translation is simply inaccurate. This is what Hitler said:

English: Today they say that Christianity is in danger, that the Catholic faith is threatened. My reply to them is: for the time being, Christians and not international atheists are now standing at Germany’s fore.

I am not merely talking about Christianity; I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties which aim to destroy Christianity. Fourteen years they have gone arm in arm with atheism. At no time was greater damage ever done to Christianity than in those years when the Christian parties ruled side by side with those who denied the very existence of God. Germany’s entire cultural life was shattered and contaminated in this period

It shall be our task to burn out these manifestations of degeneracy in literature, theater, schools, and the press—that is, in our entire culture—and to eliminate the poison which has been permeating every facet of our lives for these past fourteen years.

German: Heute sagen sie, das Christentum sei in Gefahr, der katholische Glaube bedroht. Darauf habe ich zu erwidern : Zunächst stehen heute an der Spitze Deutschlands Christen und keine internationalen Atheisten.

Ich rede nicht vom Christentum, sondern ich bekenne, daß ich mich auch niemals verbinden werde mit solchen Parteien, die das Christentum zerstören wollen. Vierzehn Jahre sind sie mit dem Atheismus Arm in Arm gegangen. Dem Christentum ist niemals größerer Abbruch getan worden als in der Zeit, da diese christlichen Parteien mit den Gottesleugnern in einer Regierung saßen. Das ganze Kulturleben Deutschlands ist in dieser Zeit zerrüttet und verseucht worden.

Es wird unsere Aufgabe sein, diese Fäulniserscheinungen in der Literatur, in Theater, in Schulen und Presse, kurz in unserer ganzen Kultur, auszubrennen und das Gift zu beseitigen, das in diesen vierzehn Jahren in unser ganzes Leben hineingeflossen ist.

For the English, see: Adolf Hitler, February 15, 1933. In, Max Domarus, The Complete Hitler: His Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945 (Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers), Pp. 253; in German, see: Max Domarus, Hitler Reden und Proklamationen 1932-1945. Kommentiert von Einem Deutschen Zeitgenossen: Teil 1 Triumph Erster Band 1932-1934 (Pamminger & Partner, Leonberg, 1988), Pp. 210-211.

The words attributed to Hitler 'We wish to fill our culture once more with the spirit of Christianity—and not only in theory.' appears to be pure invention, or at least, a very poor translation. In any case, it's self evident that this quote doesn't even correspond to the subsequent reality of National Socialism in Germany - because the National Socialist movement was by no means Christian, and had no religious mandate that you need to be Christian. Although it is true that Hitler did not align himself with parties that were opposed to Christianity, however it was only that way because Hitler understood that many Germans were Christian, that spirituality was important in the life of a people. So he took an understandably tactical position regarding the faith in Germany, nothing more.

Hitler's speech on February 15th 1933 put an emphasis on the failures of the governments which had governed Weimar Germany for the previous 12 years. The speech only mentions Christianity briefly, and does not discuss National Socialist ideological tenants. Keep in mind, this speech was made at a time when Hitler was by no means the undisputed Führer of Germany, he was preparing for the federal election vote that was taking place on March 5th (the enabling act wasn't passed until March 23rd), and directed his speech towards those parties who had contradicted their own dogmas. His example was the Christians who undermined their own faith, and thus the spiritualism of the German people, by aligning with atheist Marxism. It seems as though you're attributing more meaning to this speech than Hitler ever did.

As for the table talks, see here https://www.inconvenienthistory.com/9/3/4880

I'm well aware of this article. It's not wholly convincing to me. The situation regarding the Table Talks is very complicated and unverifiable to those who do not have access to archival material.

The point I was making in my previous post, was that irrespective of the Table Talk's validity, the quote you posted was taken out of context.

[TheGrayWolf]

Whether the text existed in the speech or not, it's clear in that speech he speaks positively and admits he wouldn't ever ally with any organization that is anti-Christian. To suggest he only said these things just to win votes is admitting he is a liar, in which a slippery slope begins, if you believe that he lied then to obtain votes, then what else did he lie about? Or was it just this one incident?

It is clear from the 25 points they intended to keep Germany as Christian. 2nd, the public policies suggest he was Christian. Churches ordered built, crucifixes required in public schools, Hitler youth required to be bused in to churches on Sundays.

I mean it is clear through several passages in Mein Kampf combined with his actions that he was Christian, albeit not practicing.

For example, from the age of 13 on until my early 30's I was still Christian but not practicing for the simple reasons that the Churches I had attended were apostate.

[Otium]

Whether the text existed in the speech or not, it's clear in that speech he speaks positively and admits he wouldn't ever ally with any organization that is anti-Christian. To suggest he only said these things just to win votes is admitting he is a liar, in which a slippery slope begins, if you believe that he lied then to obtain votes, then what else did he lie about? Or was it just this one incident?

No. I very clearly said that he was telling the truth, he didn't ally with any anti-Christian parties. Hitler quickly outmanoeuvred his conservative coalition partners, and prior to joining the Harzburg front (which he did to benefit the NSDAP not to succumb to the will of any conservatives) Hitler did not ally with other groups.

Hitler never said he wouldn't ally with anti-Christian organisations.

It is clear from the 25 points they intended to keep Germany as Christian. 2nd, the public policies suggest he was Christian. Churches ordered built, crucifixes required in public schools, Hitler youth required to be bused in to churches on Sundays.

The party program and the 25 points was composed by a council of 5 people, Hitler among them. It isn't clear how much influence Hitler had on these 25 points although he certainly accepted them, obviously. The point being that Hitler let himself be unfettered if it was practically reasonable, he wouldn't, and didn't hem himself in with stringent policy or programs. Which is why it's very hard for people who think in terms of 'ideology' to understand National Socialism. They make the erroneous mistake of equating practical policy with ideological goals. There is overlap of course, it'd be ridiculous to claim the National Socialists didn't institute policy that was in line with National Socialism. Anyway, as I've already told you, Hitler was not concerned with Christianity himself but its influence on the German people. He favoured a 'positive Christianity' in that context, which is what point 24 of the 25 points stresses.

Frankly, I find it hard to believe that the Hitler Youth were sent to Church on Sundays. I don't know of any such source that would corroborate that. However, the Hitler Youth was not opposed to Positive Christianity:

At a December 1933 speech in Braunschweig, he (Baldur von Schirach, NSDAP National Youth Leader) made a promise: "The newly-enrolled members of the Hitler Youth will not ask of their comrades: 'Are you Protestant?' or 'Are you Catholic?', only 'Are you German'." Taken in isolation, this passage would seem to offer ample evidence that the churches' fears were justified. However, in the same speech, Schirach insisted he was not anti-Christian: "They say of us that we are an anti-Christian movement. They even say that I am an outspoken paganist .... I solemnly declare here, before the German public, that I stand on the basis of Christianity, but I declare just as solemnly that I will put down every attempt to introduce confessional matters into our Hitler Youth."

[...]

In a meeting at the beginning of October, Schirach said of himself: "I belong to no confession. I am neither Protestant nor Catholic, I believe only in Germany"

Richard Steigmann-Gall, The Holy Reich: Nazi Conceptions of Christianity, 1919-1945 (Cambridge University Press, 2003), Pp. 143. See too, note 150.

Steigmann-Gall actually shows that the Hitler youth were given some private time to worship however they pleased, whether they were Christian or not. He furnishes no proof that the Hitler youth was forced to go to Church on Sundays, as if it were some mandatory religious practise.

I mean it is clear through several passages in Mein Kampf combined with his actions that he was Christian, albeit not practicing.

For example, from the age of 13 on until my early 30's I was still Christian but not practicing for the simple reasons that the Churches I had attended were apostate.

No. This is not clear. At least not from Mein Kampf:

what did the top Nazi, Adolf Hitler, have to say? Much is already known through the "Bible" of the Nazi movement, Hitler's Mein Kampf. In its pages Hitler gave no indication of being an atheist or agnostic or of believing in only a remote, rationalist divinity.60 Indeed, he referred continually to a providential, active deity: "What we must fight for is to safeguard the existence and reproduction of our race ... so that our people may mature for the fulfillment of the mission allotted it by the creator of the universe .... Peoples that bastardize themselves, or let themselves be bastardized, sin against the will of eternal Providence. " Whereas reference to a vague providential force bears little resemblance to belief in the biblical God, elsewhere in Mein Kampf Hitler intones more than a naturalist pantheism devoid of Christian content. Again, it was in the question of race and race purity in which Hitler most frequently intoned such a God: It was, in his view, the duty of Germans "to put an end to the constant and continuous original sin of racial poisoning, and to give the Almighty Creator beings such as He Himself created." Even as Hitler elsewhere made reference to an anthropomorphized "Nature," and the laws of nature that humanity must follow, he also revealed his belief that these were divine laws ordained by God: "The folkish-minded man, in particular, has the sacred duty, each in his own denomination, of making people stop just talking superficially of God's will, and actually fulfill God's will, and not let God's word be desecrated. For God's will gave men their form, their essence and their abilities. Anyone who destroys His work is declaring war on the Lord's creation, the divine will."

Ibid., p. 26-27ff.

It's possible that Hitler considered himself a non-practising Christian in the early to mid 1920s, but certainly not by the time he became Chancellor and into WW2. Goebbels notes in his diary on April 8th, 1941:

German:

Der Führer verbietet ein Bombardement Athens . Das ist richtig und edel von ihm . Rom und Athen sind Mekka für ihn . Er bedauert sehr, gegen die Griechen kämpfen zu müssen . Hätten sich dort nicht die Engländer festgesetzt, er wäre niemals den Italienern zu Hilfe geeilt. Das hätten sie, weil es ihre Sache ist , schon selbst machen müssen. Der Führer ist ein ganz auf die Antike ausgerichteter Mensch . Er haßt das Christentum, weil es alles edle Menschentum verkrüppelt hat . Christentum und Syphilis haben nach Schopenhauer die Menschheit unglücklich und unfrei gemacht . Welch ein Unterschied zwischen einem gütig und weise lächelnden Zeus und einem schmerzverzerrten gekreuzigten Christus. Auch die Gottesanschauung selbst ist bei den antiken Völkern viel edler und menschlicher als beim Christentum. Welch ein Unterschied zwischen einem düsteren Dom und einem hellen , freien antiken Tempel. Er schildert das Leben im alten Rom : Klarheit , Größe , Monumentalität . Die großartigste Republik der Geschichte. Wir würden wohl keine Enttäuschung erleben, so meint er, wenn wir jetzt plötzlich in diese alte ewige Stadt versetzt würden. Der Führer hat gar kein Verhältnis zur Goti k . Er haßt die Düsterkeit und den verschwimmenden Mystizismus. Es will Klarheit , Helligkeit, Schönheit . Das ist auch das Lebensideal unserer Zeit. Da ist der Führer ein ganz moderner Mensch . Das Augusteische Zeitalter ist ihm der Höhepunkt der Geschichte. Und was die Sklaven anbetrifft , die das Christentum angeblich befreite : Sie sind im Mittelalter viel unfreier und bedrückter gewesen als im alten Rom . Was heißt da überhaupt Sklaverei ? Ist vielleicht ein heutiger Industrieprolet freier als ein Sklave vor der amerikanischen »Freiheit« in den Südstaaten.Das sind alles Vorurteile. Ich schneide das Gespräch über die Serben an . Ich habe gerade ein interessantes Buch über die Obrenowitsch und Karageorgewitsch gelesen . Das ist eine tolle Verbrecherbande . Der Führer kennt die Dinge ganz genau. Der ganze Balkan mit all seinen Rätseln liegt vor ihm wie ein aufgeschlagenes Buch . Er erzählt mir verrückte Geschichten vom alten Nikita und seinen Töchterheiraten . Er war ein Hochstapler auf dem Thron, und das alte Wien hatte schon seine liebe Not mit ihm.

English:

The Führer forbids a bombardment of Athens. That is right and noble of him. Rome and Athens are Mecca for him. He very much regrets having to fight the Greeks. If the English had not established themselves there, he would never have rushed to the aid of the Italians. They should have done that themselves because it was their own business. The Führer is a person who is completely oriented towards antiquity. He hates Christianity because it has crippled all noble humanity. According to Schopenhauer, Christianity and syphilis made mankind unhappy and unfree. What a difference between a gracious and wise smiling Zeus and a pain-contorted crucified Christ. Even the view of God itself is much more noble and humane among the ancient peoples than with Christianity. What a difference between a gloomy cathedral and a bright, free ancient temple. He describes life in ancient Rome: clarity, size, monumentality. The greatest republic in history. We would probably not experience any disappointment, he says, if we were suddenly transferred to this old eternal city. The Führer has absolutely no relationship with the Gothic. He hates the gloom and the blurred mysticism. It wants clarity, brightness, beauty. That is also the ideal of life in our time. The Führer is a very modern person. The Augustan age is the climax of history for him. And as for the slaves that Christianity supposedly liberated: They were much less free and depressed in the Middle Ages than in ancient Rome. What does slavery mean anyway? Perhaps today's industrial proletariat is freer than a slave to American "freedom" in the southern states. These are all prejudices. I cut up the conversation about the Serbs. I have just read an interesting book about the obrenovich and karageorgewitsch. This is a great gang of criminals. The Führer knows things very well. The whole Balkans with all its riddles lies before him like an open book. He tells me crazy stories about old Nikita and his daughter marriages. He was an impostor on the throne, and old Vienna was in dire straits with him.

Herausgegeben von Ralf Georg Reuth, Joseph Goebbels Tagebücher 1924-1945: Band 4 1940-1942 (Piper Verlag, München, Auflage März 2003), Pp. 1557.

To call Hitler a 'Christian' would nevertheless be a misunderstanding of his views on religion. It just wouldn't be an accurate representation of what Hitler thought, just as it wouldn't be accurate to describe him as a pagan or an occultist. Hitler could be more accurately characterised as a Diest.

[TheGrayWolf]

I have to 100 percent completely disagree. His views on the church is the same as what we Christian Identity folk have. I don't attend a single established church for the simple fact that they sin in 1 way or another. Now, I offer 2 quotes from Mein Kampf

"I believe I am acting today in the spirit of the
Almighty Creator. By standing guard against the Jew, I am defending the work of the Lord."
Mein Kampf, page 45, Ford translation.

"The clearest indication of what this religious education can produce is the Jew himself. His life is only concerned with this world and his inner spirit is as foreign to true Christianity as his nature was two thousand years ago to the great Founder of the new teaching Himself, Jesus Christ. Jesus made no secret of His feelings toward the Jewish people, and even used the whip to drive this rival out of the Lord’s temple."
Mein Kampf, Page 203, Ford Translation

In both instances speaks of Jesus whipping the jews out of the LORD'S temple. Now, page 45, "I am defending the work of the Lord".

The Fuhrer knew the dangers and corruption of the church as he, like all of us CI, have experienced and witnessed. The worship of the jew being the man cause of not wishing to attend. One doesn't have to to attend one of their churches to be a Christian, and the Fuhrer knew this quite well.

[TheGrayWolf]

Correction, in one instance he mentions whipping the jews from the Lord's temple. In the other he speaks about doing the Lord's work. In that instance he's speaking of how he's fighting for God, which makes him a Christian.

[Otium]

I have to 100 percent completely disagree. His views on the church is the same as what we Christian Identity folk have. I don't attend a single established church for the simple fact that they sin in 1 way or another. Now, I offer 2 quotes from Mein Kampf

Your view is not supported by literally any historical evidence, much less contemporary evidence. These quotes similarly do not portray and kind of Christian sentiment. For example, the second quote from Mein Kampf is not taken correctly into context by you. Hitler is merely using Christ and Christian phraseology as an example to criticize German Christians, not proclaim himself to be one of them:

Of the moral value of Jewish religious teaching, there are, and have always been, exhaustive studies (not by Jews; Jewish drivel on this subject is always self-serving) that show this kind of religion to be utterly monstrous, from the Aryan perspective. The Jew himself is the best example of the product of this religious training. His life is only of this world, and his mentality is as foreign to the true spirit of Christianity as his character was to the great Founder of this new creed, 2,000 years ago. The Founder made no secret of his estimation of the Jewish people. When necessary, he drove those enemies of the human race out of the temple of God; then, as always, they used religion as a means of advancing their commercial interests. In return, Christ was nailed to the cross. Our modem Christians, on the other hand, enter into party politics and, when elections are being held, they debase themselves to beg for Jewish votes. They even enter into political swindles with the atheistic Jewish parties, against the interests of their own nation.

Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Volume 1: A Reckoning (New York/London: Clemens & Blair, 2018), pp. 308 f. (Dalton Translation)

His wording in the underlined shows that Hitler is not aligning himself with such people, he doesn't say 'my' or 'our fellow Christians', but refers to them as 'they', which is again distinct from 'me' or 'I'.

Thomas Dalton is right when he states that Hitler believed in a higher power, a creator perhaps, or a force which guided the universe, but not in the same way followers of traditional religions do. He used many different words and phrases to refer to this deity or 'force' of nature:

His view on God is quite intriguing. Frequently he refers to a kind of cosmic deity or divine power, but in a variety of unconventional terms. We find many references, for example, to Schicksal-fate or destiny. In chapter 5 we read of the "Goddess of Destiny" (Schicksalgottin). in chapter 7 he writes of "Providence" (Vorsehung), "Doom" or "Fate" (Verhangnis), and "the Lord" (Herrn). Elsewhere we find reference to "Chance" (Zufall) and ''the eternal Creator"(ewigen Schopfer). Volume one closes with a reference to "the Goddess of Inexorable Vengeance" (die Gottin der unerbittlichen Rache). These are not mere metaphors. It seems to be a kind of recognition of higher powers in the cosmos, but not those of traditional religions.

Ibid., p. 31.

---

See also this thread:

Was Adolf Hitler a Christian?
viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12939

[TheGrayWolf]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZQeddxNGb6ol/

He doesn't have to say outright that he's a Christian. It's implied, even by what he has said over and over again constantly. You are ignoring this because you don't like Christians.

[Otium]

https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZQeddxNGb6ol/

He doesn't have to say outright that he's a Christian. It's implied, even by what he has said over and over again constantly. You are ignoring this because you don't like Christians.

I am not ignoring this. I have addressed every single piece of evidence you have provided and it doesn't hold any weight. Especially when we have authentic first hand accounts of Hitler's private beliefs in diaries and letters, and even broadly in memoirs (which are admittedly a much more dubious source of information). The truth is you're being forced to back track to defend your view which has no basis, by saying that Hitler wasn't an overt Christian but an 'implied' Christian. In reality, there is no reason for this, if Nationalsocialism was a 'Christian' movement, then it wouldn't be 'implied', it would be overt like many others.

You can say that I 'don't like Christians' but this wouldn't be strictly true. I have nothing in particular against Christians. However I can understand why you would say this, because many people who are ardent 'Pagans' or simply atheists do hate Christians and would indeed point out many of the same things I have here. Nonetheless, I am neither a 'Pagan' nor 'atheist'. I am simply not religious, hence religion - all religion - means absolutely nothing to me. Frankly I'm infuriated by both 'Christians' and 'Pagans' who try to co-opt Hitler and Nationalsocialism into either of their two religious camps, because it shows that neither of them understand Nationalsocialism nor do they know a thing about Hitler and how he thought of Nationalsocialism. So really, I dislike both of you, pretty much equally if you must know my own personal opinion.

Regarding the video you sent. The Hitler speech being excerpted is poorly translated and out of context.

In context, on February 15, 1933 Hitler is addressing the Catholic centre party member Eugen Bolz, who was the 'Staatspräsident' of Württemberg who accused the Nationalsocialists of not standing for 'freedom' and wishing to persecute Christians. Hitler 'dismissed this charge' by stating that it was not the Nationalsocialists who aligned with godless heathens (Marxists), but instead the Catholic Centre Party who aligned with them. His other point was against the hypocrisy of the Centre Party accusing the NSDAP of not standing for freedom, when it was itself opposed to the freedom of the NSDAP.

Hitler was not going on about how he was secretly a Christian. He simply said that he was not one of those interested in destroying Christianity and made the point that it was in-fact the Christians who did the most harm to their own religion, not the NSDAP. This was his point, not that the NSDAP, nor he himself was Christian.

When he talks of 'eliminating the poison which has been permeating every facet of our lives for these past fourteen years', he's referring to the overall damage done by Atheist-Marxists, and the Christians who went hand in hand with them. This is evidenced by his emphasis on the destruction of Marxism in the very next part of the speech when he states that 'our fight against Marxism will be relentless' and that he would welcome any allies in this fight, but condemn anyone who allied with Marxism. In this instance he differentiates himself from the Christians and doesn't come close to equating the NSDAP with the Christian parties. Hence why he points out that they had allied themselves with the Marxists, and concludes his train of thought by stating that 'every movement which allies itself to Marxism will come to grief with it.'

Here is what Hitler stated (relevant parts emphasised by underlining):

I can understand when a State President judges that the hour has come for a confrontation with the new age. I am gladly willing to excuse the less than objective phrases which were used in this context, for it is not difficult to understand the internal uneasiness and nervousness of this man, of this representative of days past. Thus I would like to refrain from replying in kind; I prefer to answer objectively and dismiss each charge step by step.

In reply to State President Bolz’ accusation that we have dealt in nothing but empty words for twelve years, I may state:

It was not we who were in power for these twelve years, but rather the State President’s party. The Volk will certainly have realized by now which side was voicing these empty phrases. Twelve years constitute conclusive evidence; otherwise the others would not have joined us. In these long years of rule by the State President’s party, we have witnessed disintegration in every single sector.

It astounds me that a representative of the Center is trying to tell us something about freedom. Did our Movement not go through an outrageous chain of suppression and gagging for thirteen years at the hands of those who address us like this today? Was that freedom, when our Movement was punished and suppressed for its national aspirations? When our fighters were thrown into prison, when the shirts of our SA men were ripped off their backs, when our press was ruthlessly prohibited and when we were made to suffer everything else in these thirteen years? Those who made no mention of our freedom for fourteen years have no right to talk about it today. As Chancellor l need only use all those means once used against the friends of the nation. I need only use one law for the protection of the national state, just as they made a law for the protection of the Republic back then, and then they would realize that not everything they called freedom was worthy of the name.

And when these parties claim today that at least a gradual improvement had been in the offing, all I can say is that this did not come about because of them, but rather because this young Movement had come to life. If there is a people in Geneva who is well-disposed to us today, it is not they, but we who are to thank for initiating this development. Today they say that Christianity is in danger, that the Catholic faith is threatened. My reply to them is: for the time being, Christians and not international atheists are now standing at Germany’s fore.

I am not merely talking about Christianity; I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties which aim to destroy Christianity. Fourteen years they [Christians] have gone arm in arm with atheism. At no time was greater damage ever done to Christianity than in those years when the Christian parties ruled side by side with those who denied the very existence of God. Germany’s entire cultural life was shattered and contaminated in this period.

It shall be our task to burn out these manifestations of degeneracy in literature, theater, schools, and the press—that is, in our entire culture—and to eliminate the poison which has been permeating every facet of our lives for these past fourteen years.

And were their policies in the economic sector Christian policies? Was the inflation which accompanied their rule supposed to be a Christian undertaking?

Were the destruction of the German economy, the impoverishment of the artisan class, the collapse of the farms, the unrelenting increase in unemployment, all of which we witnessed for fourteen years, acts of Christianity?

And when today you say: we need a few more years to change this situation, then I answer: no, now it is too late for you to change things. You had fourteen years, during which the heavens gave you all the power you needed to demonstrate what you were capable of. You have failed on every count: your work has wrought only one long string of horrible aberrations.

When today we are told that we have no program, my answer is:

For two years now this other Germany has subsisted on burglaries from our store of ideas.

All of the plans for providing work for the unemployed, for labor service, etc.—they are not the work of State President Bolz; they come from our program of reconstruction from which they have been extracted, thus making their implementation outside of the framework of the program a complete impossibiliy. I repeat that our fight against Marxism will be relentless, and that every movement which allies itself to Marxism will come to grief with it. We do not want an internal war between brothers, and we regard as our allies all those wishing to join in our work of reconstruction. But let there be no doubt of one thing: The time of international Marxist-pacifist infiltration and destruction of our Vaterland is over

Max Domarus, Hitler: Speeches and Proclamations 1932-1945, Volume 1: The Years 1932 to 1934 (Wauconda: Bolchazy-Carducci Publishers, 1997), pp. 253-254.

Hitler in-fact referred to himself as a 'pagan' but certainly not in the sense that modern 'pagans' who wish to co-opt Hitler into their weird Wotan cult would like to interpret it (i.e. similar or even equivalent to the views of Himmler and his ilk). Hitler's understanding of this term was purely non-denominational, a way to say that he was not a follower of any Abrahamic religion:

The church, quite naturally, is mobilizing everything and everyone against me. Von Pfeffer102 acquainted me with some things and asked me whether I would take any steps as a result of them. I told him that I would have to speak to the Führer about it, but anything public could be interpreted only as weakness. Now the Führer, with the utmost energy, underscored this point of view: Don’t attack the churches unnecessarily (Saar issue!), but otherwise [maintain] an unshakeable ideological stance.—I am was very pleased about that and emphasized that in my official speeches I did not go beyond the bounds of what was objectively necessary for National Socialism.

The Führer has always shielded my consistent stance over the years, to the extent he could do so, given his position. Now, with a laugh, he repeatedly emphasized that he has been a pagan all along, and the time has come when the Christian poisoning is approaching its end. These remarks have remained top secret, but recently a Berlin society woman has been proudly gossiping about them. These “political” salons with many bustling, “distinguished” ladies “talking politics” are still a persistent affliction even with us, and it obviously will not be easy to overcome.

June 28, 1934; Frank Bajohr & Jürgen Matthäus (eds.), The Political Diary of Alfred Rosenberg and the Onset of the Holocaust (Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015), p. 36.)

[TheGrayWolf]

"June 28, 1934; Frank Bajohr & Jürgen Matthäus (eds.), The Political Diary of Alfred Rosenberg and the Onset of the Holocaust (Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015), p. 36.)"

I'm going to stop you right there. Do you have any sources that are not from jews themselves? Considering they have a very strong history of doctoring information. It states: "Based on previously inaccessible diary notes written by one of the most prominent Nazis". What notes? Who found them? When and where were they found? How are you certain that they are authentic?

"Hitler in-fact referred to himself as a 'pagan'" Incorrect, this is from a book based on "notes that haven't been shown to the public, we don't know if they are authentic, and they go against the very things he's said in speeches and in documents. Christogenea already went through and completely destroyed the table talks. And the link you gave me of this discussion clearly supports that those translations are a fraud.

I've given you 2 quotes from Mein Kampf, 1 in which he very clearly states that he is doing the work of the Lord. How is that not an indication that he is in fact Christian? Couple that with the fact that he's said in actual recorded speeches about Christianity multiple times over:


https://www.bitchute.com/video/kxJjPYuvhrp4/

The National Government will therefore regard it as its first and foremost duty to reestablish the unity of spirit and will of our Volk. It will preserve and defend the foundations upon which the power of our nation rests. It will firmly defend Christianity as the basis of our entire morality, and the family as the nucleus of the body of our Volk and state."

I have stated it over and over he did not attend many churches for the simple fact that he saw them as we do as being corrupted.

[Otium]

I'm going to stop you right there. Do you have any sources that are not from jews themselves? Considering they have a very strong history of doctoring information. It states: "Based on previously inaccessible diary notes written by one of the most prominent Nazis". What notes? Who found them? When and where were they found? How are you certain that they are authentic?

"Hitler in-fact referred to himself as a 'pagan'" Incorrect, this is from a book based on "notes that haven't been shown to the public, we don't know if they are authentic, and they go against the very things he's said in speeches and in documents. Christogenea already went through and completely destroyed the table talks. And the link you gave me of this discussion clearly supports that those translations are a fraud.

The source is 'not from the Jews themselves' but from Rosenberg himself.

The notes were previously inaccessible, although if you're aware of the sordid details of how and by whom the Rosenberg diary was transferred from hand to hand over the years before being found in 2013 then you would know that the 'inaccessible' notes are Rosenberg's (obviously) and it refers to the bulk of his diaries from 1936-1944 or so. The earlier diaries of which I quoted were never lost, but actually filed at Nuremberg and designated as 1749-PS and 198-PS, respectively. However, the diary was never entered into evidence and was stolen by the unsanctimonious Jew Robert Kempner, who was infamous for pilfering original documentary material from Nuremberg. (See David Irving's coverage of the search for Rosenberg's diaries here)

According to Robert G. Storey the executive trial counsel for the United States in his 'Outline of Method of Capture, Processing and Assembling Documentary Evidence, and Plan of Presentation to the Tribunal' noted that Rosenberg's diaries and 'Nazi party correspondence' were 'found behind a false wall in an old castle in Eastern Bavaria.' (IMT, XXV, p. 3. cf. Bajohr & Matthäus, pp. 468 ff.) There is more information about this provided in a letter dated July 20, 1945 to the 'Office of the United States Chief of Counsel' by Lieutenant John W. English. I will quote the relevant excerpts from letter and attach the scan of this original letter held by the US National Archives and Record Administration (NARA) to the quotation so you can read the whole thing:

In addition to the above I ascertained from Lieut. Cali, Documents Officer at Bayreuth, that records of the Ministry headed by Alfred Rosenberg, were located at Schloss Banz, Lichtenfels, Bavaria. Lieut. Loeb and I proceeded to Lichtenfels to investigate this deposit, and found that the material was still located at Schloss Banz behind a false wall and was substantially intact. We made arrangements, on behalf of your office, to have it prepared for shipment, and Lieut. Loeb was requested to proceed with two trucks from Wiesbaden to take these records in their entirety to Bayreuth or Paris, where they would be picked up by OSS plane. It is expected that this material will be in Paris today.

[...]

It is of interest to note that Colonel George M. Allan of Judge Advocate General's office of the 3rd Army proceeded to Schloss Banz three weeks ago, and took from the Rosenberg records a tin box containing, according to report, Rosenberg's Diary and certain personal papers. [...] Schloss Banz is in the territory of the 7th Army. This has been reported to Colonel Storey, who is taking appropriate action.

Source: NARA, RG 226, Entry 148, Box 76.

The editors of Rosenberg's complete diary now published have a section in which they detail the history of the diary, addressing all of the questions you have. I will refrain from repeating them here. But needless to say, there is no question as to their authenticity, because at the end of the day we have the originals and they're no longer missing nor inaccessible, and all can be accounted for.

Now I will quote the original German for the entry of June 28, 1934 and also attach the original handwritten diary page:

Die Kirche macht, ganz natürlich, alles gegen mich mobil. v. Pfeffer teilte mir einiges mit u. fragte mich, ob ich irgendwelche Konsequenzen daraus ziehen würde. Ich sagte ihm, dass ich den Führer darüber sprechen müsste, etwas öffentliches aber könnte nur als Schwäche gedeutet werden. Den gleichen Standpunkt unterstrich der Führer jetzt mit aller Energie: Die Kirchen nicht unnütz angreifen (Saarfrage!), sonst aber von unerschütterlicher weltanschaulicher Haltung. – Ich bin war darüber sehr befriedigt u. betonte, dass ich in meinen offiziellen Reden nicht die Grenzen des objektiv für den NS. Notwendigen verliesse.

Der Führer hat die Jahre über immer meinen konsequenten Standpunkt geschirmt, soweit er das bei seiner Stellung tun konnte. Er betonte lachend nun mehr als einmal, er sei von jeher Heide gewesen, es sei jetzt die Zeit gekommen, da die christliche Vergiftung ihrem Ende entgegengehe. Diese Ausführungen sind streng geheim geblieben, neuerdings tratscht aber eine Salonlöwin Berlins stolz darüber herum. Diese »politischen« Salons mit viel emsigen »politisierenden« »repräsentativen« Damen sind eine auch bei uns noch fortdauernde Krankheit, die zu überwinden offenbar nicht leicht sein wird.

28.06.1934; Frank Bajohr & Jürgen Matthäus (eds.), Alfred Rosenberg: Die Tagebücher von 1934 bis 1944 (Frankfurt/Main: S. Fischer Verlag, 2015), pp. 139-140. Relevant page from the original handwritten diary:

Source: NARA, RG 238, NM-66, Entry 1, Box 120. (page 23)

The handwriting here is identical to the loose-leaf diary pages (written on the back of pages with official NSDAP letterhead) which have been recovered and transcribed for the years 1936-1944 (originals held by US Holocaust Memorial Museum; USHMMA RG-71 box 43; and the Bundesarchiv, Koblenz; BArch N 1812/1). The only difference between the diaries from 1934-35 and those later ones is that the 100 or so pages for these are written in a red leather journal.

Your claims about the notes not being shown to the public, implying they're hidden or somehow untrustworthy is a result of your own ignorance. So when you say "we don't know if they are authentic" what you really mean is that you don't know if they're authentic; because you really have no clue about any of the information behind this document. You shouldn't jump to such wild conclusions, nobody should believe you if that's what you do. Neither I, nor anyone else should trust your judgement in these matters.

Anyway, as far as I'm aware there are no 'documents' in which Hitler admits to being Christian. You yourself said it was 'implied' that he didn't say it outright. You cannot have it both ways. In his speeches he uses what can be seen as 'Christian' but also nondenominational terminology to refer to God, fate or providence. I already explained the quotes you gave from Mein Kampf and they don't indicate Hitler was Christian, merely that he used certain terminology.

The latter quote you provide, without a source, is from Hitler's first radio address to the nation on February 1, 1933. Evidently, as the Rosenberg diary allows us to realise, he was not speaking of his own personal conviction of Christianity, but merely emphasising that aspect of Germany's 'Christian' roots to help them realise a healthy cultural outlet. He did embrace a live and let live policy towards religion, except for Jews of course. However, this changed at the beginning of the war:

German:

Führer spricht wieder lange über Glauben und sein Verhältnis zu den Kirchen. Zweifellos tritt immer mehr unter der Scharfmacherei von B(ormann) und H(immler) eine unversöhnlichere Haltung ein. Während er früher noch die Kirchen leben lassen und dulden wollte, ist er jetzt kampfentschlossen. Wörtlich sagt F.: „Der Krieg ist in dieser Hinsicht, wie auch in mancher anderen Angelegenheit, eine günstige Gelegenheit, um sie (die Kirchenfrage) in Bausch und Bogen zu erledigen." Schon im Altertum seien ganze Völker liquidiert worden. Volksstämme seien so nebenbei umgesiedelt, und die Sowjetunion habe ja gerade in letzter Zeit genügend Beispiele gegeben, wie man es machen könne. An einer Tatsache käme man beim Deutschen allerdings leider nicht vorbei. Das sei seine Gründlichkeit und sein Hang zur Tradition, ferner zum Mystischen. Wenn er jetzt gegen die rebellierenden „Pfaffen" noch nichts unternähme, dann nicht zuletzt auch mit Rücksicht auf die Wehrmacht. Dort renne man eben noch zum Feldgottesdienst, und ihm sei immer noch ein Soldat, der mit dem lieben Gott tapfer sei, lieber als einer, der ohne lieben Gott feige sei. Aber hier würde die Erziehung in der SS, die gerade jetzt im Kriege beweisen werde, daß man weltanschaulich geschult auch ohne lieben Gott tapfer sei, die notwendige Entwicklung vorzeichnen.

English:

F. [Führer] spoke at length again about religious belief and his attitude to the churches. Undoubtedly under sniper fire from B(ormann) and H(immler) a less conciliatory attitude is developing. Whereas in the past he wanted to live and let live, he is now determined to fight the churches. F. literally: ‘The war, here as in many other areas, presents a favourable opportunity to dispose of it (the church question) root and branch.’ In days gone by, whole peoples had been liquidated. Tribes had settled nearby, the Soviet Union had recently provided plenty of examples how that could be done. One thing that the Germans had not been bettered in was their thoroughness and inclination to tradition, even to mysticism. If he continued to take no action against the rebellious clergy, then that was not least for the sake of the Wehrmacht. There the men ran to religious services in the field, and he preferred to have a soldier who was brave because he believed in God rather than a soldier who was cowardly because he did not. But here education in the SS, which was proving in wartime that a man schooled in the world view of affairs could also be brave without God, was showing the necessary way forward.

20.01.1940; Hildegard von Kotze (ed.), Heeresadjutant bei Hitler, 1938–1943: Aufzeichnungen des Majors Engel (Stuttgart: Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt, 1976), pp. 70-71

Engel's diary is kind of an oddball for reasons I will not mention here. But this entry is cognisant with those from both the Rosenberg and Goebbels diaries (eg. in both diaries from December 14, 1941) in which Hitler is extremely hostile to the Church. This negates whatever problems the Table Talks have, which is primarily that they're not verbatim records, and have been edited with further reminiscences/corrections. They're not wholly wrong, but are basically entwined with the views/words of those who wrote them down rather than pure expository from Hitler himself. There are only a few authentic records which exist and should be put into their own book at some later date.

---

Here is a graphic I put together:

[TheGrayWolf]

Okay, so you provided the sources of those text. That doesn't mean is was indeed "Pagan" as you claim. Many have made the claim that he was a Satanist despite the fact he speaks ill of Satan twice in Mein Kampf.

Now you cited from those texts:

"Now, with a laugh, he repeatedly emphasized that he has been a pagan all along, and the time has come when the Christian poisoning is approaching its end."

Again this doesn't match anything of what he has said in his own voice in his speeches, or written down at all.

Below is from a website that I just quoted earlier that has very serious answers which pretty much debunk what you're saying. It is no secret that Bormann has edited his texts.

Moreover, Dr. Picker regarded his own recording as authentic and insisted that "no confidence can be placed in Bormann's editing of it." Indeed, he writes, rather testily, of "Bormann's alterations, not authorised by me." [Trevor-Roper, p.viii]. Unfortunately, we do not have the unaltered version of Dr. Picker's or Heim's recordings.

which confirms that he in fact lied. It is clear that Rosenberg is doing the same thing here for political gain after the Fuhrer passes so they can remove Christianity, but have something that they can use to show the public that the Fuhrer supported it.

Source:
https://web.archive.org/web/20130428225858/http://www.nobeliefs.com/HitlerSources.htm

"The table talk reflects thoughts that do not occur in Hitler's other private or public conversations

If Hitler actually desired to eliminate personal Christianity, then why do we not find it in his other private dialogs and conversations? Why do we not find it in any of his public speeches or interviews?

In the Secret Conversations with Hitler, two recently discovered confidential interviews were given by Richard Breiting in 1931. Breiting was a member of the German People's Party. In these conversations, (which were actually more private than the Table-Talk), Hitler reveals his aims and plans. Like the Table-Talk, the notes were taken in short-hand. Unlike the Table-Talk, which Hitler knew would later be revealed, Hitler was assured that his statements would be kept secret. [Calic, p.11] Moreover, the Secret Conversations were authenticated as written solely by Breiting (unlike the editing by Bormann). Yet nowhere in these conversations does Hitler denounce religion. On the contrary, Hitler mentions a conciliation with Roman and German Catholicism where "people like von Papen and many others are establishing good relations with the Vatican."

In Hitler-- Memoirs of a Confidant, Hitler reveals himself through conversation to colleagues from a conference on economic policy. In it Hitler is reported to have spoken, glowingly, about raising the "treasures of the living Christ," "the persecution of the true Christians and sanctimonious churches that have placed themselves between God and man and to turn away from the anti-Christian , smug individualism of the past," and "to educate the youth in particular in the spirit of those of Christ's words that we must interpret anew: love one another; be considerate of your fellow man; remember that each of you is not alone a creature of God, but that you are all brothers!" [Turner, Ch. 23]

Nowhere in the Memoirs do we find a Bormann-like anti-Christian statements as found in the Table-Talk."

One can see what is going on here. We have some Germans who completely despise Christianity and have not only doctored (Table talks), but outright fabricated things that cannot be verified. Every speech and every text from the fuhrer himself contradicts everything that Bormann and Rosenberg have both said, and are NOT in alignment at all with what he has been known to have said, both public and private.

Nowhere does Hitler denounce Jesus or his Christianity

A damaging blow to any apologist argument against Hitler's Christianity comes from the fact that nowhere in any known source does Hitler denounce his Christianity or Jesus.

If one is to use the Table-Talk as evidence against Hitler's Christianity, then where does it appear? Nowhere in Trevor-Roper's introduction does he argue that Hitler was not a Christian.

Nowhere in the conversations of Table-Talk, does Hitler denounce his Christianity or Jesus.

On the contrary, Hitler's (or Bormann's editing) aims to show that the Church form of religion produces lies, and that the original Christian religion was an incarnation of Bolshevism, from a falsification from St. Paul. But whenever he mentions Christ, Hitler has nothing but admiration:

Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism the destroyer. Nevertheless, the Galilean, who later was called Christ, intended something quite different. He must be regarded as a popular leader who too up His position against Jewry. Galilee was a colony where the Romans had probably installed Gallic legionaries, and it's certain that Jesus was not a Jew. The Jews, by the way, regarded Him as the son of a whore-- of a whore and a Roman soldier.

The decisive falsification of Jesus's doctrine was the work of St. Paul. He gave himself to this work with subtlety and for purposes of personal exploitation. For the Galiean's object was to liberate His country from Jewish oppression. He set Himself against Jewish capitalism, and that's why the Jews liquidated Him.
-Hitler [Table-Talk, p. 76]
Christ was an Aryan, and St. Paul used his doctrine to mobilise the criminal underworld and thus organise a proto-Bolsevism.
-Hitler [Table-Talk, p. 143]

As tortured as Hitler's logic is, He never condemns Jesus. On the contrary, he sees Jesus as an Aryan, a liberator against Jewish oppression! If Hitler did not see himself as a Christian, then why doesn't he condemn Jesus? Why doesn't he accuse Christ as being a Jew? Why does he see Christ as a liberator?

Biographer John Toland explains Hitler's reason for exterminating the Jews:

Still a member in good standing of the Church of Rome despite detestation of its hierarchy, 'I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so,' he carried within him its teaching that the Jew was the killer of God. The extermination, therefore, could be done without a twinge of conscience since he was merely acting as the avenging hand of God-- so long as it was done impersonally, without cruelty.[Toland, p. 703]

Moreover, there are no known documents, speeches, or proclamations by Hitler where he even comes close to denouncing his belief in Christianity, or Jesus.

The Protestant and Catholic Churches in Hitler's time never accused Hitler of apostasy. Hitler's Christianity in Germany was never questioned until years after WWII and then only by Western Christians who are embarrassed to have him as a member of their faith-system.

The reasoning by the apologists in regards to the Table-Talk seems to be that because Hitler spoke against organized religion, then he must therefore be anti-Christian. But even if we take this simplistic approach and assume the Table-Talk as the actual thoughts and beliefs of Hitler, it fails for the simple reason that dismissing a religion of one's own faith does not exclude or excuse one from a personal belief as a Christian. A Christian is simply a person who believes in God and Jesus in some form or manner. Christianity, the body of believing people, simply does not require organized religion at all.

There are many examples of prominent Christians who denounced religions who opposed their own personal beliefs. Indeed, the Protestant reformer, Martin Luther who was once a Catholic monk, denounced the Catholic hierarchy as the work of the anti-Christ and established by the Devil [Against the Papacy established by the Devil (1545)]. Yet I have yet to see a Lutheran accuse Luther as being a non-Christian. The history of Christianity is filled with examples of people of differing Christian faiths denouncing each other. I have personally conversed with many Christians who have denounced all forms of religious organizations, yet they have a strong belief in God and Jesus Christ.

Indeed, even the Table-Talk has Hitler saying:

Luther had the merit of rising against the Pope and the organization of the Church. It was the first of the great revolutions. And thanks to his translation of the Bible, Luther replaced our dialects by the great German language! -Table-Talk [p. 9]

If simply speaking against a Christian religion were enough to oust one from Christianity, then some of the most influential Christians would have to reside with Hitler.

The papacy is truly the real power and tyranny of the Antichrist.... As beautiful as it was to keep a state of virginity, in the early days of Christianity, so abominable has it now become, when it is used as a means of eliciting Christ's help and grace. -Martin Luther (Luther's Confession, March 1528)

We maintain that the government of the Church was converted into a species of foul and insufferable tyranny. -John Calvin (The Necessity of Reforming the Church, 1544)

If we used the same logic of the apologists against Hitler, then we should remove Luther, Calvin, and many other prominent so-called-Christians from membership of Christianity.

Now so far as the table talks are concerned, here is a very important set of questions and answers:

In Albert Speer's memoirs, Speer recalls Hitler as saying: "The church is certainly necessary for the people. It is a strong and conservative element." [Speer, p. 95] Although Hitler approved of destroying Judaism and other cults, never did he give orders against the Protestant or Catholic Church. Why not?

Even in the Table-Talk, although he wished the 'Bolshevism' form of Christianity to die a natural death, he expressed his views on the future:

I envisage the future, therefore, as follows: First of all, to each man his private creed. Superstition shall not lose its rights. The Party is sheltered from the danger of competing with the religions. -Table-Talk [p. 62]

Nor can the Table-Talk be used to argue for an atheist Hitler:

We don't want to educate anyone in atheism. Table-Talk [p. 6]

An uneducated man, on the other hand, runs the risk of going over to atheism (which is a return to the state of the animal)... Table-Talk [p. 59]

Nor can the Table-Talk be used to argue for a pagan Hitler:

It seems to me that nothing would be more foolish than to re-establish the worship of Wotan. Our old mythology had ceased to be viable when Christianity implanted itself. -Table-Talk [p. 61]

And as for Rosenberg stating that he "Let out a laugh" and declared he was a Pagan all along, this is contradicted by Speer:

Even more revealing from Speer comes this revelation:

Even after 1942 Hitler went on maintaining that he regarded the church as indispensable in political life. He would be happy, he said in one of those teatime talks at Obersalzberg, if someday a prominent churchman turned up who was suited to lead one of the churches- or if possible both the Catholic and Protestant churches reunited. He still regretted that Reich Bishop Muller was not the right man to carry out his far-reaching plans. But he sharply condemned the campaign against the church, calling it a crime against the future of the nation. For it was impossible, he said, to replace the church by any party ideology. [Speer, p. 95]

Also

The established Methodist church paper, the Friedensglocke, vouched for the authenticity of a story about Hitler where he invited a group of deaconesses from the Bethel Institutions into his home at Obersalzberg:

The deaconesses entered the chamber and were astonished to see the pictures of Frederick the Great, Luther, and Bismarck on the wall. Then Hitler said:

Those are the three greatest men that God has given the German people. From Fredrick the Great I have learned bravery, and from Bismarck statecraft. The greatest of the three is Dr. Martin Luther, for he made it possible to bring unity among the German tribes by giving them a common language through his translation of the Bible into German....

[Note that Hitler's own words about his admiration for Martin Luther are expressed in Mein Kampf.]

One sister could not refrain from saying: Herr Reichkanzler, from where do you get the courage to undertake the great changes in the whole Reich?

Thereupon Hitler took out of his pocket the New Testament of Dr. Martin Luther, which one could see had been used very much, and said earnestly: "From God's word." [Helmreich, p. 139]

Even the Cardinal Faulhaber of Munich who visited Hitler at his mountain retreat in Obersalzburg confessed:

Without a doubt the chancellor lives in faith in God. He recognizes Christianity as the foundation of Western culture...[Helmreich, p.279]

And this comes from reputable Christian sources of the day including a Cardinal! How odd that there are Christians today who think they can divine the mind of an anti-Christian Hitler they never met, removed by a generation, and dismiss all his direct quotes about Jesus, while denying their own brethren of the Church who actually talked with Hitler. If prominent Christians in the 1930s could be so easily deceived, could not be the same be applied to today's Christians? And if deception describes the temper of the faithful, then what does that say for Christianity as a whole and the thinking process that it entails?

I could go on and on but the link is above and has a lot of information that not only contradict what some of his political rivals say, but also what you are saying in that he's not a Christian. For someone who's "not a Christian" he sure spends a lot of time talking both positively about it and working to defend it. Now why is it that he's so fervent with Christianity and not a single text or speech shows his zeal for paganism of any kind? Sure that he has used old Germanic history in some aspects, even I can admit that I adore ancient Greek and Roman buildings and mythology for the sake of history, but that doesn't make me pagan.

And on a personal unrelated note, may I ask, why is your profile pic from a Satanic artist that did the art for Atomwaffen division? They're really well known for being from the order of nine angles, and are strongly anti-Christian.

[TheGrayWolf]

On another important note, there is this speech that clearly refutes everything that you've laid out. What others say about the Fuhrer doesn't matter. Find me speeches and texts (Unaltered and unforged, IE Table talks) from the Fuhrer that supports anything that says he's not a Christian.

I have this speech from the city of Passau:

Through the limitless sense of sacrifice that already enthralls millions today, a sense of sacrifice that also reaches beyond the borders of the country. She has already driven a symbol beyond the marked German borders. It is the national color of the coming new generation. The bourgeoisie like it. Parties look beyond the border posts, the new Germany already sees the new form in front of it, which consistently overlooks this junk, a form that will create the prerequisites that are necessary on the outside. For us, Parliament is a fencing ground on which our world view is represented. In particular, we do not believe that Parliament will save Germany, that a German National Assembly could do that, rather that the idea of ​​a leader can one day save Germany! This movement has received an extraordinary degree of freedom of operation, which in the highest sense of the word allows everything to be put aside that could in any way divide the people.

We have different faiths in Germany, but we are one: which faith conquers the other, that is not the question, rather whether Christianity stands or falls, that is the question! Today we see before us the inheritance of the people, touching everything. There is no then into which any piece of his heaven is pointed. We will never allow a religious quarrel to arise in this movement, we say rather: the church may educate the parties to religious service, we educate them to fight and to preserve its world view and its foundations! We are convinced that when Christ descends on earth today, that he will not refuse blessings to those who strive to put Christianity into practice, to remove mutual self-help, class struggle, and status arrogance, we will strive, strive to make it clear to everyone that it’s a shame not wanting to see the need after we’re trying to suppress German culture being dragged down. We do not tolerate anyone in our ranks who offends the ideas of Christianity, who stands up to a dissident, fights him, or provokes himself as a hereditary enemy of Christianity. This movement of ours is actually Christian.

We are filled with the wish that Catholics and Protestants may find one another in the deep need of our own people. We will stop any attempt to bring religious thought up for discussion in any way within our movement. And when we fight the Center [Party], we don’t do it for religious reasons, but because it makes fun of the word “Christianity” and scorns it because it is willing to throw Christianity overboard for the ministerial chair. We are fighting the Center for national political reasons, not because it wants to be a Catholic party. Beware of those who walk in sheep’s clothing! We reserve the right not to degrade Christianity to political service. Adolf Hitler. October 27, 1928

And the original German:

Durch den grenzenlosen Opfersinn, der Millionen heute bereits beselt, ein Opfersinn, der hinausgreift auch über die Grenzen des Landes. Sie hat ein Symbol bereits hinausgetrieben über die abgesteckten deutschen Grenzen. Es ist die Staatsfarbe des kommenden neuen Geschlechts. Es mögen die bürgerl. Parteien über die Grenzpfähle sehen, das neue Deutschland sieht bereits die neue Form vor sich, das durchgehend hinwegsieht über diesen Plunder, iene Form die voraussetzungen schaffen wird, die nach aussen hin notwendig sind. Für uns ist das Parlament ein Fechtboden, auf dem unsere Weltanschuung vertreten wird. Namentlich glauben wir nicht, dass durch das Parlament Deutschland gerettet wird, dass eine deutsche Nationalversammlung das vermöchte, vielmehr, dass der Gedanke der Führerpersönlichkeit Deutschland eines Tages retten kann! Diese Bewegung hat eine ausserordentliche Operationsfreiheit beokmmen, die im höchsten Sinne des Wortes gestattet, alles zurückzustellen, was irgendwie trennen könnte im Volke.

Wir sind verschieden gläubig in Deutschland, sind aber eins: Welcher Glaube den anderen besiegt, das ist nicht die Frage, vielmehr, ob das Christentum steht oder fällt das ist die Frage! Wir sehen heute vor uns den Erbteil der Menschen, sehen ihn alles antasten. Es gibt kein damals, in das irgend ein Stück von seinem Himmels hineingerichtet wird. Wir werden niemals dulden, dass in dieser Bewegung ein religiöser Streit entsteht, wir sagen vielmehr: die Kirche möge die Parteien erziehen zum religiösen Dienst, wir erziehen sie zum Kampfe und zur Erhaltung seiner Weltanschauung und seiner Grundlagen! Wir sind überzeugt: wenn heute Christus auf Erden herunter kommt, dass er den Segen denen nicht verweigern wird, die sich bemühen, das Christentum praktisch anzuwenden, gegenseitige Selbsthilfe, Klassenkampf und Standesdünkel herauszunehemen, werden wir uns bemühen, bemühen, jedem klar zu machen, dass es eine Schande ist, die Not nicht sehen zu wollen, nachdem wir bemüht sind, zu ünterdrucken, dass deutsche Kultur heruntergezerrt wird. Jn unseren Reihen dulden wir keinen, der die Gedanken des Christentums verletzt, der einem anders Gesinnten Wilderstand entgegenträgt, ihn bekämpft oder sich als Erbfeind des Christentums provoziert.

Diese unsere Bewegung ist tatsächlich christlich. Wir sind erfüllt von dem Wunsche, dass Katholiken und Protestanten sich einander finden mögen in der tiefen Not unseres eigenen Volkes. Wir werden jeden Versuch unterbinden, den religiösen Gedanken in unserer Bewegung irgendwie zur Diskussion zu setzen. Und wenn wir das Zentrum bekämpfen, tun wir es nicht aus religiösen Gründen, sondern, weilesmit dem Wort “Christentum” Spott und Hohn treibt, weil es bereit ist, für den Ministerstuhl das Christentum über Bord zu werfen. Aus nationalpolitischen Gründen bekämpfen wir das Zentrum, nicht, weil es eine katholische Partei sein will. Hütet euch vor denen, die im Schafspelz einhergehen! Wir verwahren uns, das Christentum zu politischen Diensten zu degradieren.

Nothing you have shared refutes his actions. Nobody has to come out and declare they are a Christian when their actions speak volumes. The table talks have been debunked, and it's clear that those who accuse the Fuhrer of being Anti-Christian had an agenda.