Why are we fighting against the Church of Rome?

1. Everything we talk about the church here is not for the public and is strictly confidential.

2. The church struggle already exists today, but not nearly as openly as it will be conducted later.

3. Order from Reichsführer SS, that church issues may not be discussed with outsiders.

4. Why do we call ourselves deists (‘believers in a God’) and what is the difference between the God of the Catholic Church and our God.

5. The church and through it JUDAISM presents us with a personal God. A God who avenges and punishes, who threatens and hates! But the Christian God is ready to do to make deals. Against corresponding human actions, good or bad, he pays back with equal.

6. Christianity demands of us that we acknowledge ourselves in humility as poor, sinful human beings.

7. They claim that the woman’s body is unclean and that therefore every human being is born already burdened with original sin.

8. Intercourse with a woman is portrayed as an act of uncleanness and is therefore labeled as a sin.

9. We, on the other hand, see the woman as a human being equal to the man and venerate the mother who gives life to a child; we venerate our mothers and their love for us as one of the holiest things there is for us. The mother is the bearer of the blood and the bloodline, and (she) fights her fight for the nation in her own way.

10. When the church says: Be humble, we say be proud, and what the priests (specific derogative slur: ‘Pfaffe’) renounce in their preaching, we say, ambition, strength, and pride, are our virtues.

11. The church also preaches loyalty first, but only conditionally and bound to the church, but we preach loyalty to our blood, our race.

12. The Church says that everything bearing the human likeness (all who bear the human countenance) is/are equal!”

13. We maintain, on the other hand, that God created the races so that they could maintain their purity and that each should work within its own sphere.

14. Everything the church teaches is unreal and invisible: God, soul, self, spirit, free will or unfree will, mercy, sin, salvation, punishment, forgiveness of sin and from this the church derives the principle that one has to believe without seeing!

15. But what we consider to be God is visible: sun, moon, stars, summer and winter, autumn and spring, humans and forest, animals and sea, rain and thunderstorms, storm and cold. The works of men, in which the divine is expressed. All of this is visible and because we can see it and explain much of it, it is sinful in the eyes of the church or according to its teaching.

16. For the greater honor of God!

    Counter-selection — the artificial selection that keeps alive for us so many sick, weak, living-dead people — all as images of God.

    For the greater honor of God, thousands of people went to the scaffold; among them men of great intellect, such as Giordano Bruno. Thousands of women of good blood had to be burned as witches, for the greater honor of God.

    The witch-superstition today!!!

    The Sistine choirs in Rome. Castrati for the greater honor of God!!!

    Everything that bears a human likeness is equal!!!

    Thus every “Negro” is equal to a white person, regardless of whether the white person has a higher culture than the black. Every gangster, every child-murderer, every swindler and crook is equal before God, if only he quickly asks for his absolution five minutes before the final deadline.

17. The Afterlife. We conduct our entire life here on earth only for an afterlife that no human being actually knows, because no one has yet come back from there and given us a report of what it looks like there.

    Some examples from Nietzsche’s The Antichrist!

Within this same archival record, there is confirmation that SS troops were intentionally exposed selectively to varying levels of vehement ideological sentiment. In this example, a programmatic lecture by the anti-Christian writer Jakob Schaffner.

SS Main Office

Wesserling, 15 Aug. 1944

Subject: Lecture by the poet Jakob Schaffner

Reference: local letter of 7 Aug. 1944, file ref. Ru/Mo

Enclosure: -1-

To the

SS Main Office, Office CI,

Lobositz.

The head of Department VI of the SS Convalescents Battalion Wesserling attended the lectures by Schaffner in Gebweiler and Wesserling.

The lectures were delivered by Schaffner in flawless form and met with lively approval among all listeners.

It must, however, be stated that the lecture given by him, “On the Nature of the German Reich Idea,” is not suitable for all men and it is proposed in future to have him lecture only before selected men. The lecturer himself also made the same suggestion.

At the same time, the Department VI of the SS Convalescents Battalion reports that Jakob Schaffner has declared himself willing to give the same lecture before SS Junkers of the Leadership schools at Bad Tölz and Braunschweig.

It is therefore requested from here that direct contact be made with Jakob Schaffner.

This referenced lecture (Vom Wesen der deutschen Reichsidee) can be read here.

Here are a few notable excerpts:

Page 180

• He presents Orthodox/Roman (or orthodox non-Arian confessional Protestant) Christianity as something imposed on Germanic peoples and praises Arianism as the more “Germanic” alternative. Additionally, he depicts Christian conversion as immorally coercive psychological breaking, calls Christ the “pale Savior,” and puts “redemption” in quotation marks.

German:

Auf dem weltlichen Gebiet wurde römisches Staats- und Privatrecht und römische Verwaltung auferlegt, auf dem kulturellen das Christentum in der Fassung, die den Segen des römischen Papstes hatte. Zu diesem Zweck hatte man den sozusagen protestantischen Arianismus, dem die Germanen durch alle Stämme anhingen, zuerst feierlich verdammt und dann durch Feuer und Schwert ausgerottet.

English:

In the secular realm, Roman public and private law and Roman administration were imposed; in the cultural realm, Christianity in the version that had the blessing of the Roman pope. For this purpose, the so-called Protestant Arianism, to which the Germanic peoples of all tribes adhered, was first solemnly condemned and then exterminated by fire and sword.

German:

… und wo ein Stamm sich dem bleichen Heiland, der ihm unverständlich war, nicht beugen wollte, da brachte ihn der weltliche Arm in die notwendige Verfassung des Unglücks und der Selbstverzweiflung, der dann die Heilbotschaft Trost und „Erlösung“ bedeuten konnte.

English:

… and where a tribe would not bow to the pale Savior, who was incomprehensible to them, there the secular arm brought it into the necessary condition of misfortune and self-despair, in which the message of salvation could then mean comfort and “redemption.”

Page 181

• He directly attacks New Testament Christianity, especially Matthew and Paul, as something that degraded “Nordic” identity. Schaffner rejects core Nicene Christianity: Christ’s equality with God and Christ as mediator. He remakes Christ into a racial-political “leader.” There is an attack on the doctrine of original sin, the devil, church authority, and the Christian view of fallen humanity as “misery-thinking” and a “disease.”

German:

Wer vorwärtskommen wollte, mußte das Evangelium Matthäi und die Lehre Pauli bekennen. Zurück blieb allem nordischen Urwesen ein peinlicher Minderwert bis an die Schwelle unsrer Zeit.

English:

Anyone who wished to advance had to profess the Gospel of Matthew and the teaching of Paul. An embarrassing inferiority remained attached to every Nordic primal essence down to the threshold of our own time.

German:

Den germanischen Stämmen der Völkerwanderung, die noch dem Presbyter Arian angehangen hatten, war Christus in aller Größe ein Geschöpf gewesen, nicht mit Gott gleich. So konnten sie ihn verstehen, ohne auf sich selbst und ihre eigene gottunmittelbare Würde verzichten zu müssen. Die Völker brauchen keinen Mittler, sie brauchen Führer! Christus, der Führer: das begriffen sie.

English:

For the Germanic tribes of the Migration Period who had still adhered to the presbyter Arius, Christ in all his greatness had been a created being, not equal with God. Thus they could understand him without having to renounce their own god-given dignity. Peoples need no mediator; they need leaders! (Führers!) Christ the leader (Führer): that they understood.

German:

Die Macht der Kirche verlangt aber die Brechung der menschlichen Urtümlichkeit, die vom Teufel und mit der Erbsünde behaftet ist, und so ist morgenländisches Elendsdenken mit lateinischen Mitteln über stolze nordische Völker gekommen wie eine Krankheit, deren Verwahrlosungszustände und Fieberparoxysmen ganze Jahrhunderte der Geschichte erfüllt haben.

English:

But the power of the church demands the breaking of human primality, which is afflicted by the devil and by original sin; and so oriental misery-thinking came, by Latin means, over proud Nordic peoples like a disease, whose states of neglect and feverish paroxysms filled whole centuries of history.

Page 191

• He rejects priestly mediation and, by implication, the Christian doctrine of Christ as mediator. It replaces mediation with Führer-principle spirituality.

German:

Mit dieser Stellung innerhalb der Gemeinschaft und mit der Stellung der Gemeinschaft zur Vaterhaftigkeit ist auch gesagt, daß wir keine Mittler mehr brauchen, um zum Gottes- und zum Reichserlebnis zu kommen, sondern nur Führer…

English:

With this position within the community, and with the position of the community toward fatherliness, it is also said that we need no mediators in order to come to the experience of God and of the Reich, only (a/the) Führer…

Page 192

• While attacking Protestant biblical Christianity, he criticizes Luther for binding the Reformation to Scripture, and dismisses the Bible as a “Jewish-Mediterranean collection of texts.”

German:

Luther hat auch angestrebt, aber er hat sich an den Wortlaut einer jüdisch-mittelmeerischen Textsammlung gebunden und dadurch gleich beim Entstehen die Verengung und Erstarrung seiner Reformation eingeleitet…

English:

Luther also strove for that, but he bound himself to the wording of a Jewish-Mediterranean collection of texts and thereby, just as it emerged, introduced the narrowing and hardening of his Reformation…

Pages 201–202

• He places “religious dogmatism” alongside ideological enemies to be overcome, and frames both “Roman” and “Jewish” inheritances as hostile specters. In context, that includes Roman Christianity and biblical/Jewish roots of Christianity.

German:

In diesen Tagen muß und wird im deutschen Volk überwunden werden das römische wie das jüdische Gespenst, der Kapitalismus wie der Nihilismus, der Bolschewismus wie der Klassensinn, der Atheismus wie der religiöse Dogmatismus.

English:

In these days there must and will be overcome in the German people both the Roman and the Jewish specter, capitalism as well as nihilism, Bolshevism as well as class-consciousness, atheism as well as religious dogmatism.

In Jakob Schaffner’s semi-autobiographical (it’s his biography but told as a character named Johannes) book Johannes (1922) he states that Christ’s death may have moved, shaken, and exalted him emotionally, but it never made him feel redeemed. He also argues that a truly divine redemption should not still depend on faith or end in a new judgment, and he describes Pauline predestination to salvation or damnation as a sharp “Pauline dissonance” within Christianity.

German:

Eine dritte architektonische Kuppelung war nötig zwischen dem Kreuzestod des Erlösers, der aus dem unüberblickbaren Trieb der Liebe sich opferte, und dem Weltgericht, das zum ewigen Sieg des Lichtes und der Gottheit überleitete. Mit Christi Liebestat war ja nun durch die Lehre im Grund ein neuer Schlangenapfel in die Welt gebracht, nur mit umgekehrter Wirkung. Weil die ersten Menschen die Frucht der Erkenntnis genossen, waren sie verloren. Die Menschen nach Christo jedoch sind verloren und werden gerichtet, insofern sie nicht erkennen, nämlich im Glauben. Eine Erlösung, wenn sie wirklich eine Erlösung aus überirdischer, göttlicher Kraft ist, dürfte nicht mehr auf ein Mittel angewiesen sein, wie es der Glaube ist, und dürfte auf kein neues Gericht hinauslaufen. Ich persönlich habe mich zeit meines Lebens keinen Moment durch Christi Tod erlöst gefühlt. Ergriffen, erschüttert, in den Tiefen gepackt und zu großen menschlichen Höhen aufgetürmt, ja! Aber niemals erlöst!

Dann war da die schneidende paulinische Dissonanz wenige Jahre nach Christi Tod, daß man zur Seligkeit wie zur Verdammnis vorbestimmt sei, eine Lehre, die dem Herrn Vater besonders wichtig und wert gewesen war. Dieser Trakt des christlichen Gebäudes erforderte die kühnsten und gemütvollsten Überwindungen. Sie verlangte nach aller Liebe und Großmut, die sogar die Kirchenväter in ihrem Leben und Martyrium der Menschheit schuldig geblieben waren. Ich hatte Augenblicke voller Gefühl und Anschauung, in denen mir die Wölbung dieses dreischiffigen Domes widerspruchslos, aber auch ohne Worte, gelang, so daß meine Seele andächtig die langen Aspekte der Schöpfung, des Sündenfalles und der Erlösung hinunter und hinauf wandern konnte, während durch die farbigen Fenster herein der Strahlenglanz des Tausendjährigen Reiches leuchtete und im Lichterschein des Altars das Unaussprechliche seine Geheimnisse hütete.

English:

A third architectural coupling was necessary between the redemptive death on the cross of the Redeemer, who sacrificed himself out of the immeasurable impulse of love, and the Last Judgment, which led over into the eternal victory of light and divinity. Through Christian teaching, Christ’s act of love had now, in essence, brought a new serpent’s apple into the world — only with the opposite effect. Because the first human beings ate the fruit of knowledge, they were lost. But human beings after Christ are lost and are judged insofar as they do not know — namely, through faith. A redemption, if it is truly a redemption by supernatural, divine power, ought no longer to be dependent on a means such as faith, and ought not to lead to any new judgment. Personally, I have not, for a single moment in all my life, felt myself redeemed by Christ’s death. Moved, shaken, gripped in the depths and raised up to great human heights — yes! But never redeemed!

Then there was the cutting Pauline dissonance, only a few years after Christ’s death, that one is predestined both to blessedness and to damnation — a doctrine that had been especially important and precious to Herr Vater. This wing of the Christian edifice required the boldest and most heartfelt acts of overcoming. It demanded all the love and magnanimity that even the Church Fathers, in their lives and martyrdom, had still owed to humanity. I had moments full of feeling and vision in which the vaulting of this three-aisled cathedral came together for me without contradiction, but also without words, so that my soul could wander reverently down and up the long vistas of Creation, the Fall, and Redemption, while through the colored windows the radiant splendor of the Thousand-Year Reich shone in, and in the light-glow of the altar the Ineffable guarded its mysteries.

This Pauline component also ideologically connects with Hitler’s own beliefs on the matter.

Does this sound like a truly or authentically Christian ideological system or government to you?

G. K.'s Weekly

THE JUDAISM OF HITLER

By G. K. CHESTERTON

HITLERISM is almost entirely of Jewish origin. This truth, if inscribed in the noble old German lettering on a large banner and lifted in sight of an excited mob in a modern German town, might or might not have the soothing effect which I desire. This simple historical explanation, if written on a post-card or a telegraph-form, and addressed to Herr Hitler’s private address, might or might not cause him to pause in his political career, and reconsider all human history in the light of the blazing illumination, with which I have furnished him in these words. Finally, these words, placed even where they stand at the beginning of this paragraph, may not be wholly comprehended or connected with their true historical origins; but they are none the less strictly historical.

It is a horrible shame to say I was ever unkind to a Nordic Man. I have had many of these innocent creatures of God gambolling round my house from time to time, and I have always found them faithful and affectionate; when treated and trusted, as they should be, with faith and affection. I am very fond of the real Nordic Man, especially when he does really look like a Nordic Man; as, for example, when he is a Scandinavian. I think the Scandinavian is a thoroughly nice fellow; and probably a much better man than I. Hitler does not look in the least like a Nordic Man; but that is another question, and need not discredit his personal good qualities. But, when it comes to the reading of history, there is one thing that I can never for the life of me see. I can easily believe that a nice large Scandinavian may have brought great elements of strength or simplicity into any family into which he married; and what is true of the Scandinavian may be quite often true of the German. But what I frankly and flatly deny, in history as a whole, is that any Nordic Men ever brought anything in the way of an idea into the world. The Germans came in due course to describe their piracy as imperialism; but they borrowed the idea of imperialism from the Romans. They produced a sort of Prussianism that was praised or blamed as militarism; but they borrowed the idea of militarism from the French. The German Emperors modelled themselves on the Austrian Emperors, who had modelled themselves on the Greek Emperors and the Roman Emperors. The greatest of the Prussians did not even conceal his contempt for Prussia. He refused to talk anything but French, or to exchange ideas with anybody, except somebody of the type of Voltaire. Then came the liberal ideas of the French Revolution, and the whole movement of German Unity was originally a liberal movement on the lines of the French Revolution. Then came the more modern and much more mortally dangerous idea of Race; which the Germans borrowed from a Frenchman named Gobineau. And on top of that idea of Race, came the grand, imperial and insane idea of a Chosen Race, of a sacred seed that is, as the Kaiser said, the salt of the earth; of a people that is God’s favourite and guided by him, in a sense in which he does not guide other and lesser peoples. And if anybody asks where anybody got that idea, there is only one possible or conceivable answer. He got it from the Jews.

It is perfectly true that the Jews have been very powerful in Germany. It is only just to Hitler to say that they have been too powerful in Germany. The Germans will find it very hard to cut up their culture on a principle of Anti-Semite amputation. They will find it difficult to persuade any German, let alone any European who is fond of Germany, that Schiller is a poet and Heine is not; that Goethe is a critic and Lessing is not; that Beethoven is a composer and Mendelssohn is not; that Bach is a musician and Brahms is not. But again, it is but just to Hitlerism to say that the Jews did infect Germany with a good many things less harmless than the lyrics of Heine or the melodies of Mendelssohn. It is true that many Jews toiled at that obscure conspiracy against Christendom, which some of them can never abandon; and sometimes it was marked not by obscurity but obscenity. It is true that they were financiers, or in other words usurers; it is true that they fattened on the worst forms of Capitalism; and it is inevitable that, on losing these advantages of Capitalism, they naturally took refuge in its other form, which is Communism. For both Capitalism and Communism rest on the same idea: a centralisation of wealth which destroys private property. But among the thousand and one ways in which Semitism affected Germanism is in this mystical idea, which came through Protestantism. Here the Nordic Men, who are never thinkers, were entirely at the mercy of the Jews, who are always thinkers. When the Reformation had rent away the more Nordic sort of German from the old idea of human fellowship in a Faith open to all, they obviously needed some other idea that would at least look equally large and towering and transcendental. They began to get it through the passionate devotion of historical Protestants to the Old Testament. That, of course, is where the joke comes in; that the Protestants now wish to select for destruction what nobody else except the Protestants had ever wanted to select and set apart for idolatry. But that is a later stage of the story. By concentrating on the ancient story of the Covenant with Israel, and losing the counter-weight of the idea of the universal Church of Christendom, they grew more and more into the mood of seeing their religion as a mystical religion of Race. And then, by the same modern processes, their education fell into the hands of the Jews. There are Jewish mystics and Jewish sceptics; but about this one matter of the strange sacredness of his own race, almost every Jewish sceptic is a Jewish mystic. When they insinuated their ideals into German culture, they doubtless very often acted, not only as sceptics, but as cynics. But, even if they were only pretending to be mystics, they could only pretend to understand one kind of mysticism. Thus, German mysticism became more and more like Jewish mysticism: a thing not thinking much of ordinary human beings, the hewers of wood and drawers of water, the Gentiles or the strangers; but thinking with intense imagination of the idea of a holy house or family, alone dedicated to heaven and therefore to triumph. This is the great Prussian illusion of pride, for which thousands of Jews have recently been rabbled or ruined or driven from their homes. I am certainly not enough of an Anti-Semite to say that it served them right.

But it is true that it all began with the power of the Jews; which has now ended with the persecution of the Jews. People like the Hitlerites never had any ideas of their own; they got this idea indirectly through the Protestants, that is primarily through the Prussians; but they got it originally from the Jews. In the Jews it has even a certain tragic grandeur; as of men separated and sealed and waiting for a unique destiny. But until we have utterly destroyed it among Christians, we shall never restore Christendom.

AUDIO:

Aside from the garbage in the other books they were actually selling at the conference, many defending Ogden have presented Antelope Hill’s WW2 related publishing decisions as being sober-minded historic retrieval.

This is false, and their book of “the essential speeches of Adolf Hitler” contains an example of it.

This compilation (purportedly) includes the famous and early Hitler speech “Warum sind wir Antisemiten?” (1920) beginning on page 25. In the middle of this speech, Hitler goes on a rant where he levies the accusation that the Jews™ had used Christianity to destroy the Roman Empire (he adored the Roman empire) and claims Christianity was a subversion spread primarily by Jews™:

“Now we also know of the same process in Rome. We know that it was precisely the Jew who made use of Christianity — not out of love for Christianity, but partly only from the realization that this new religion above all rejected earthly power and state authority and recognized only a higher, otherworldly lord; that this religion had laid the axe to the root of the Roman state, which was built upon the authority of officials. And he (the Jews) became the bearer of this new religion, its greatest propagator, and he (the Jews) used it not in order to become Christian himself — he could not do that at all; he always remained the Jew — exactly as today our socialist of Jewish race never lowers himself to the worker, but always remains the master and only feigns being a socialist.”

Antelope Hill omits this section entirely from their translation of the speech.

Omissions are admitted by Antelope Hill, supposedly for the purpose of brevity.

I can think of other reasons why this section of the speech was removed.

I’d imagine you probably can too.

Don’t stop noticing. 😉

One example of this is this Correspondence between Wehrmacht soldiers Hans Albring and Eugen Altrogge during the war, March of 1942, discussing treatment of the Jews:

Last night, we sat and talked—about things that make one ashamed to be German. What you hear here about how the “chosen people” are being treated. This has nothing to do with anti-Semitism anymore; it’s inhumanity of a kind one should no longer believe possible in the 20th century, this “enlightened, modern era.” How will we ever atone for this? Hearing such accounts (and here you get them firsthand) makes one despair at the meaning of our fight. But what else is left for us? Shut up and continue to serve—

SOURCE

Yet another example of this is this letter from 1942 which notes the psychological toll on SS commander Erich von dem Bach-Zelewski for executing Jews in the east.

“he particularly suffers from thoughts related to the executions of Jews [Judenerschiessungen] that he himself oversaw and other harrowing experiences in the East.”

SOURCE - (BArch) NS 19/2874

Some hyper-niche and rightfully marginalized self-identifying “pastors” like Michael Spangler will tell you that the Nazi ideology did the opposite of spiritually scandalizing the German people. These rightfully marginalized self-identifying “pastors” also coincidently refuse to engage in any public debate on this topic.

Prepared in the special unit of the Division of European affairs by Raymond E. Murphy, Francis B. Stevens, Howard Trivers [and] Joseph M. Roland.

The National Socialist Party is Hitler, and Hitler is the party. The National Socialists believe in Hitler, who embodies their will. Therefore our conscience is clearly and exactly defined. Only what Adolf Hitler, our Führer, commands, allows, or does not allow is our conscience. We have no understanding for him who hides behind an anonymous conscience, behind God, whom everybody conceives according to his wishes.

We do not recognize it when an individual, whoever he may be, tries to shirk his responsibility to his people and his Führer under the pretext that he is responsible only to his conscience and God. To me, to every National Socialist, to every decent-minded German, our Führer, our party, and our people are our conscience. Adolf Hitler is Germany, and Germany is Adolf Hitler. That is the greatest force of the party and the German people.

This explicitly idolatrous mentality aligns perfectly with Goebbels’s words that “National Socialism is unthinkable without Hitler” in “Battle for Berlin”.

It’s interesting that a publisher beloved by many wignats like “antelope hill” also publishes Goebbels’s book containing these sentiments. If only we could figure out what’s going on here. If only we could figure out why they all share the same opinions on anything related to WW2. Complete mystery.

Antelope Hill publishes a variety of kinist/”christian Nationalist” books.

This kinist compilation contains some delusional and asinine claims about how prohibition on fabric mixing in the Old Testament ceremonial law is evidence that interracial marriage is sin:

I respond to parts of this “sword of Christ” book here:

There is no reason for Christians to be simping for heretical and idolatrous death cults.

Article can be found HERE

Because Ray appears almost entirely unfamiliar with the Abwehr conspiracy and the broader resistance, he makes the mistake of asserting this false claim multiple times in our debate.

A lesser magistrate is defined within the Magdeburg Confession by their position within a hierarchy. They are subject to a "higher" or "superior" authority (such as an Emperor or a Monarch) but still possess a distinct, lawful authority within their own jurisdiction

The confession gives examples of permitted/righteous armed resistance by “inferiors against superiors" within the context even of military leaders like "a Master of the Horse". The confession grounds this in "the law of nature", a concept I'd imagine EDW would be fond of:

"The most praiseworthy and powerful emperor Trajan, out of the innermost sources of natural law, pronounces on this question of defense by inferiors against superiors in political affairs. When he appointed a Master of the Horse for himself, he handed a sword to him, saying, 'Use this sword against my enemies, if I give righteous commands; but if I give unrighteous commands, use it against me.'

This saying is celebrated and is truly of the law of the nature, that is, of divine law. Therefore, just as Christ in the gospel does not abolish the knowledge of theoretical or practical principles, or the Law of God itself, but rather establishes it, as the Apostle says, so neither does He abolish this opinion concerning necessary defense, but rather, Christian magistrates may piously use it – nay, they are under obligation to do so, because of the commandment of God, as we have already demonstrated at length by testimonies, arguments, and examples from the Word of God."

Here are some figures from the Abwehr conspiracy and the broader July 20 resistance network:

Henning von Tresckow - Major general and chief of staff of the German Second Army, formerly a key officer at Army Group Centre, with real military command authority and the ability to shape or transmit orders through the Wehrmacht chain of command.

“I am still totally convinced that we did the right thing... When, in a few hours’ time, I go before God to account for what I have done and left undone, I know I will be able to justify in good conscience what I did in the struggle against Hitler.”

Helmuth James von Moltke - War-administration councilor in the Abwehr/OKW and expert adviser on international law and the laws of war, giving him official state-military legal authority to resist immoral military policy.

He wrote to his wife that he stood before the court “as a Christian and nothing else,” and that the Nazis were terrified because he had discussed the “practical, ethical demands of Christianity” with clergymen.

Wilhelm Canaris - Admiral and chief of the Abwehr, exercising official military-intelligence authority beneath Hitler’s regime.

Hans Oster - Major general and senior Abwehr officer, using an official military post within the state’s command structure.

Friedrich Olbricht - General and head of the General Army Office, controlling key Reserve Army machinery used in Operation Valkyrie.

Albrecht Mertz von Quirnheim - Colonel and chief of staff to Olbricht, positioned inside the Reserve Army command system that issued Valkyrie orders.

Carl-Heinrich von Stülpnagel - Military commander in occupied France, holding territorial command authority over German forces and security operations there.

Paul von Hase - Berlin city commandant, holding direct military authority in the capital during the attempted coup.

Fritz-Dietlof von der Schulenburg - Civil servant who became district administrator of Fischhausen, later deputy police president of Berlin, and then government president and deputy regional commissioner of Breslau.

These men were not private vigilantes; many were subordinate public authorities acting from within real offices of delegated command, administration, or jurisdiction.

I’m very grateful to ‪@ReformationRedPill‬​ (X here) for hosting and I think the conversation was much needed.

From the “Evangelical Dark Web” blog:

Other relevant statements in Evangelical Dark Web’s videos:

Proverbs 10:23

Clips taken from my longer “Stone Choir and the Big Lie Lies” video

“With Bouhler, discussed the question of the quiet liquidation of the mentally ill. 40,000 are gone, 60,000 must still go. This is a hard but also necessary task. And it must now be done. Bouhler is the right man for it.”

“Bouhler” is in reference to Philipp Bouhler, a Nazi Party functionary and primary officer responsible for the Aktion T4 program.

Keep also in mind, the 1943 propaganda film Im Wald von Katyn was commissioned by Goebbels and refers to the mass-murder of Poles by the Bolsheviks as “liquidation”.

Any clown (or supposed “pastor”) you encounter who quotes gullible tools like Cajus Fabricius as being authoritative and shills for the the supreme Christian morality of Nazism should be immediately dismissed in light of evidence like this.

Near Smolensk, Polish mass graves have been discovered. The Bolsheviks have here simply shot about 10,000 Polish prisoners, among them also civilian prisoners, bishops, intellectuals, artists, etc., and buried them in mass graves. Over these mass graves they arranged installations in order to make the traces of their sacrilegious deeds disappear. Through information from the inhabitants, the secret of these shootings has been uncovered, and now a dreadful devastation of the human soul is revealed.

[more continued below]

April 9th and 14th 1943

Goebbels records in these entries the discovery of Polish mass graves near Smolensk, killed by the Soviets. The USSR denied this massacre (the Katyn massacre) for decades. If the Soviets fabricated the diaries as some claim, why depict him privately affirming Soviet responsibility? Why would the soviets fabricate a source that undermines their own propaganda and reveals that they were lying?

Corey Mahler (of “Stone Choir”) and others have claimed that Goebbels’s diary is a forgery, presumably made by the soviets, despite there being no explanation for how this was practically done (e.g. altering microfiche the size of your pinky nail?)

If Mahler is so confident that the Goebbels diary is a forgery (despite him being in disagreement with revisionists themselves) why doesn’t he expose himself to a debate over my premise (that Hitler hated Christ) and in that debate make his case against the sources themselves? The reason he will not do this is because he knows he is incapable (more on the “Tischreden” here, here, and here).

I’ve covered Stone Choir’s dishonesty regarding the holocaust and WW2 in general and at length here. There’s also quite a few other tools out there that seem to have the same complete disregard for truth regarding this period of history as Stone Choir does, some of whom are LARPing as pastors. They are solely motivated by their ideological possession, and they will excuse, defend, or minimize all degeneracy relating to Nazism insofar as it supports their political machinations.

Aarvoll tells us he wants his new version of “christianity” to include pagans and worship of their gods. He explains he wants to “open up what is permissible in terms of worship so that pagans don’t have to go outside the church” while also being “open to the holy spirit”.

His goal is to “reform” Christianity to align it with his beliefs of “semi”-marcionism and rejection of substitutionary atonement as the central message of the bible. Aarvoll believes we need a “new denomination” of Christianity and that atoning death of Christ is not the core biblical message. He calls the atoning death of Christ “scapegoat sacrifice blood magic”.

He’s the gullible inheritor of a convoluted and contradictory ideological mashup:

“I believe that whoever looks at nature with open eyes becomes the most devout of men; not in the sense of church piety, but in the manner of inner self-reflection. [...] The Bolshevik front teaches us this: they know no God and yet understand how to die.

If National Socialism were to rule for a longer period, one would no longer be able to think of anything else at all. In the long run, Church and National Socialism cannot exist side by side. [...] The heaviest blow that has struck mankind is Christianity; Bolshevism is the illegitimate son of Christianity; both are offspring of the Jew.

Through Christianity there entered into the world the infamous lie in matters of religion; in the same way Bolshevism lies when it claims to bring freedom, while it seeks only to see slaves. In the ancient world, a shimmering sense of reverence lay over the relationship of man to divinity; its hallmark was tolerance. Christianity reserved for itself the right to cruelly kill countless people in the name of love; its hallmark is intolerance.

Without Christianity there would have been no Mohammedanism; the Roman Empire would have developed and expanded into world dominion under Germanic leadership; mankind would not have been thrown back fifteen hundred years in its development. One should not say that Christianity brought about inwardness; that would have arisen anyway. The consequence of the collapse of the Roman Empire was nothingness for centuries.”

July 11/12 1941 - BArch NS 18/1396 Notizen, Vermerke, Fernschreiben, Abschriften Bd. 2 p.93-96

This Table Talks record, which I reference in my superthread on this topic, was not later manipulated, fabricated, or editorialized, but is instead accurate to the immediate record of what was stated by Hitler:

@Ehrenkrieg2 also makes a very astute observation that Christa Schroeder recorded the following just a day or two after the above statements by Hitler, in regard to Hitler’s beliefs based on what she observed in his monologues.

“At our evening discussions with the Chief, the Church plays a major role. It’s a pity you can’t be there sometimes. Everything the Chief says is so convincing, for example when he explains that Christianity, with its lies and hypocrisy, has set humanity back in its development — culturally speaking — by two thousand years. I really must finally start making notes afterwards on the Chief’s arguments. But these sessions always last an incredibly long time, and afterwards one is — even if not exactly ready to collapse — still so drained and lacking in energy that there is none left for writing.

The night before last, when we came out from the Chief’s place, it was already light. Instead of going to bed, as sensible people would have done, we went into the kitchen, ate a few sandwiches, and then went for a two-hour walk straight into the sunrise. Past cattle and horse paddocks, past hills which, covered in red and white clover, looked simply fairytale-like in the morning sun, and which I could not look at enough — and then back to bed.

Before two or three o’clock we are simply incapable of getting up. A mad life, isn’t it? Such a strange profession as the one Daranowski and I have will hardly ever exist again. Eating, drinking, sleeping, occasionally writing something, and in between providing company for hours on end. Lately we have been making ourselves useful inasmuch as we pick flowers for the Chief, so that the bunker does not look quite so bare …”

13 July 1941 - Christa Schroeder’s letter to my girlfriend from the Führer Headquarters “Wolfsschanze”

(More extensive ideological corroboration detailed here)

As I have been saying for a long time, there is no reasonably conceivable scenario that explains the alignment of all these sources of information. There is no evidence for grand conspiracy to fabricate official documents about Hitler’s words and insert them into contemporary record inside Hitler’s headquarters in 1941, while also having Christa Schroeder reference his words in a personal letter several days later. It doesn’t make even a shred of sense to propose.

The reality is that Hitler hated Christ, and no amount of low resolution jpeg memes or Wehrmacht belt buckles with preexisting Prussian-origin mottos about Gott will change that.

Chapters:

00:00 Cold Open

4:02 Intro

5:17 Modern Propaganda

7:45 Stone Choir Struggle Session

12:39 Scapegoating Jews for the 20th Century

22:12 A German Utopia?

32:35 Eastern Warsplaining

40:05 Jews, Germans, and Christianity

48:05 "Germany Must Perish"?

53:05 Concentration & Extermination Camps

1:51:22 Exaggerated Numbers?

2:05:15 Camps Cont'd

2:14:57 Exaggerated Evil?

2:36:56 Stone Choir's Big Lie

F[ührer] at table: Christianity is the rebellion against creation. It is the perversion of all the laws of nature, which, even in the smallest process of fertilization, are based upon struggle and the selection of the best.

Translators disagree on the parenetical portion at the end of the paragraph. None of them that I’ve seen read properly to my eye. It’s likely this relates to clarifying something about the “survival of the fittest” with sperm and egg.

This is the section in reference:

Interestingly, he also awkwardly writes “Christentum” as “Chris tentum” in several other places in his diary.

Not only is this passage yet another validation of my position that Hitler hated Christ, it also corroborates the Tischgespräch (Table Talk) monologue notes we have from that exact same day.

Christianity is a rebellion against fundamental law, a protest against creation; if consistently implemented, it would lead to the breeding of inferiors.

I challenge anyone who disputes my (and many actual historians) use of these sources to provide an alternative and realistic explanation for the corroborations seen here and elsewhere that both I and have pointed out. Until that can be done, sporadic assertions about Bormann’s biases or ill-thought-out remarks related to the Soviet Archives and misunderstandings of microfiche technology are irrelevant to the discussion, and do nothing but mislead ignorant people.

“Under Bormann’s direction [I am] very often in meetings on monastery confiscations, [and in the] sub-department for church matters; about new regulations, etc. Recently he (Bormann) had a circular issued to the Gauleiters on Christianity and National Socialism, which completely compiles various statements of the Führer made during table talks.”

Note that Rosenberg explicitly says that the views communicated in this document from Bormann were reflective of Hitler’s beliefs as expressed in his evening Table Talks (Tischgespräche). This aligns with what we have from those records.

That referenced document from Bormann was a circular from the Head of the Party Chancellery to all Gauleiters (natsoc district governors) regarding the relationship between National Socialism and Christianity from June of 1941.

Here is that document:

Subject: Relationship between National Socialism and Christianity

From circles of the “German Christians,” a Gauleiter received a written exchange with the Evangelical Oberkirchenrat (Supreme Church Council) in which the sender advocates for a stronger affiliation of the “German Evangelical Church in Greater Germany” with National Socialism.
The Gauleiter showed me this correspondence and asked me for a statement on the fundamental position regarding this matter.
Below I give you strictly confidential knowledge of my reply to this Gauleiter:

“National Socialist and Christian conceptions are incompatible. The Christian churches are built upon the ignorance of mankind, and they strive to maintain this ignorance as much as possible, for only then can they preserve their power.

In contrast, National Socialism is based on scientific foundations.
Christianity has laid immutable principles that have remained unchanged for almost two thousand years and have increasingly become rigid dogma.
National Socialism, on the other hand, must always fulfill its mission by orienting itself according to the latest scientific knowledge.

The Christian churches have recognized the dangers threatening their existence from exact scientific discoveries since time immemorial and have therefore tried, through pseudo-science such as theology, to suppress or falsify scientific research that contradicted their dogma.

Our National Socialist worldview, however, stands far higher than the views of Christianity, which in their essential points have been taken over from Judaism.
For this reason as well, we have no need of Christianity.

No one would know anything about Christianity if it were not instilled in people during childhood by the clergy.
The so-called ‘Christian God’ gives no knowledge of His existence to young people on His own; rather, despite His alleged omnipotence, He astonishingly leaves this task to the efforts of the pastors.

Once our youth are no longer instructed about this Christianity - whose teachings are far removed from our own - Christianity will disappear of itself.

It is also remarkable that mankind, before the beginning of our present era, knew nothing of this Christian God, and that even since that time, by far the greater part of the earth’s inhabitants have learned nothing of Him - and thus, according to the presumptuous Christian view, are already damned from the start.

When we National Socialists speak of a belief in God, we do not mean, like the naive Christians and their clerical exploiters, a being who resembles man and roams somewhere in the heavens.
We mean, rather, the law-governed order of the universe:
that in the great cosmos, beside our tiny and utterly insignificant earth, there exist an unimaginable number of other celestial bodies;
that bodies such as our sun are surrounded by planets, and these again by smaller bodies, the moons.”

So not only do we have Rosenberg affirming that he believes Bormann’s words here reflect Hitler’s views, we have corroboration between what was knowledge of Hitler’s views on religion in the Table Talks (Tischgespräche) and yet another contemporary source.

As I’ve expressed before to interlocutors, the convergence between these documents makes alternative explanations highly implausible; the most reasonable conclusion is that they authentically reflect the beliefs of those who composed and circulated them.