10.04.202522:16
The Reichsführer-ᛋᛋ Personal Staff
Berlin, January 31, 1940
Attached, I am sending, on behalf of the Reichsführer-ᛋᛋ, a Bible dating from the 13th century, which was secured during the occupation of the Catholic seminary in Płock.
The Reichsführer-ᛋᛋ requests that this Bible be restored as necessary since he intends to keep it in the library of Monestary Wewelsburg. Please inform me when the Bible is finished and available for dispatch. On behalf of
ᛋᛋ-Hauptsturmführer
Berlin, January 31, 1940
Attached, I am sending, on behalf of the Reichsführer-ᛋᛋ, a Bible dating from the 13th century, which was secured during the occupation of the Catholic seminary in Płock.
The Reichsführer-ᛋᛋ requests that this Bible be restored as necessary since he intends to keep it in the library of Monestary Wewelsburg. Please inform me when the Bible is finished and available for dispatch. On behalf of
ᛋᛋ-Hauptsturmführer
09.04.202507:14
08.04.202523:04
SS — Pagan Graves?
No. We need to understand Himmler to understand the context of the graves and the pre-Christian [although not many] elements of the SS.
— Hans Schmidt, SS Panzergrenadier, p. 43:
“Within a little more than two years after being appointed as the Reichsfuhrer or national commander of the SS, Heinrich Himmler had managed to enlarge his organization to about 30,000 men. No mean feat for anybody. He also imbued his order with a mythology combining Germanic (pre-Christian) rites, a strict adherence to racial laws and unquestioned fealty to Adolf Hitler.” [1]
Read 'SS Defender Against Bolshevism' to understand the context of the graves and the other ancient traditions. They considered the graves to be ancient Germanic graves, they didn't see them as pagan. NS Heathenry seems to don't understand this basic concept.
Here's another example of this, in SS Defender Against Bolshevism, Germanic Law:
“Ancient Germanic law prevented any unauthorized individual from destroying anything in nature that is holy for all men and created by God. Until relatively recent times it was forbidden in Germanic settlements to cut down a tree within the village without the agreement of the other peasants. If a tree was cut down, this was tied to the obligation to plant three new young trees.” [2]
Heathen/pagan law Ancient Germanic Law. Also read the 'Faith in God' chapter:
They recognized these graves as ancient traditions of their people, not as pagan graves. It was entirely under a different context. And also: the SS refused to the idea that they were atheist, and view the term "pagan" as an insult. Drawing a sharp and distinct line between religious/church/denominational activity and political/world-view soldiery
You can still find Christians celebrating their nations ancient traditions (not worship of old deities), practically all over Europe. This doesn't make them heathens or anti-Christians.
Source:
[1] Hans Schmidt, SS Panzergrenadier, p. 43
[2] SS Defender Against Bolshevism, pp. 7, 19.
No. We need to understand Himmler to understand the context of the graves and the pre-Christian [although not many] elements of the SS.
— Hans Schmidt, SS Panzergrenadier, p. 43:
“Within a little more than two years after being appointed as the Reichsfuhrer or national commander of the SS, Heinrich Himmler had managed to enlarge his organization to about 30,000 men. No mean feat for anybody. He also imbued his order with a mythology combining Germanic (pre-Christian) rites, a strict adherence to racial laws and unquestioned fealty to Adolf Hitler.” [1]
Read 'SS Defender Against Bolshevism' to understand the context of the graves and the other ancient traditions. They considered the graves to be ancient Germanic graves, they didn't see them as pagan. NS Heathenry seems to don't understand this basic concept.
Here's another example of this, in SS Defender Against Bolshevism, Germanic Law:
“Ancient Germanic law prevented any unauthorized individual from destroying anything in nature that is holy for all men and created by God. Until relatively recent times it was forbidden in Germanic settlements to cut down a tree within the village without the agreement of the other peasants. If a tree was cut down, this was tied to the obligation to plant three new young trees.” [2]
Heathen/pagan law Ancient Germanic Law. Also read the 'Faith in God' chapter:
The answer is: “We swear to you, Adolf Hitler, as führer and chancellor of the German Reich, loyalty and courage. We promise you and the superiors designated by you obedience unto death. So help us GOD!”
The second question is: “So you believe in a God?”
The answer is: “Yes, I believe in a God!”
The third question is: “What do you think of a person who does not
believe in God?”
The answer is: “I consider him arrogant, megalomaniac and dumb. He is not suited for us.”
I have informed you of these three questions and answers in order to clearly present our stand on religion. Be assured that we would not be able to form such an ironclad corps, if we did not have conviction and faith in a God who stands over us, who has created us, our fatherland, our folk and the earth, and who has sent us our Führer. We are piously convinced that in accordance with the eternal laws of this earth we must stand by every deed, every word and every thought. Everything that our mind thinks up, our tongue speaks and our hand carries out does not stop with its execution, rather it is a cause that will have an effect, an inescapable course that will return to us and our folk as a blessing or as a curse. Believe me, people with this stance are anything but atheists. We refuse to allow ourselves to be slandered as atheists - through misuse of the term PAGAN - simply because we as a community do not embrace a particular denomination or dogma or demand this from any of our men. We allow ourselves the right and the freedom to draw a sharp and distinct line between religious/church/denominational activity and political/world-view soldiery, and we will fiercely combat any violation. Likewise, we teach our men - despite much justified outrage and many bad experiences that our folk has had in this area in the past - to respect everything that is holy to any folk comrade - due to his education and conviction - without any insult in word or deed. [Ibid]
They recognized these graves as ancient traditions of their people, not as pagan graves. It was entirely under a different context. And also: the SS refused to the idea that they were atheist, and view the term "pagan" as an insult. Drawing a sharp and distinct line between religious/church/denominational activity and political/world-view soldiery
You can still find Christians celebrating their nations ancient traditions (not worship of old deities), practically all over Europe. This doesn't make them heathens or anti-Christians.
Source:
[1] Hans Schmidt, SS Panzergrenadier, p. 43
[2] SS Defender Against Bolshevism, pp. 7, 19.
04.04.202521:13
Claim:
“H. Picker manuscripts are genuine...”
— Mikael Nilsson actually said it:
“[1] In this chapter I have investigated the publication of Tischgespräche and pointed out a number of source-critical problems with this text and its history. Tisch gespräche was very controversial from the outset, and both the IfZ and Gerhard Ritter faced a lot of criticism for having agreed to publish it. [...] I have shown that Picker made a large number of changes to the text compared to the version published in 1951. The changes are, on the one hand, minor, but on the other hand major in their implications. They show that Picker did not shy away from putting words in Hitler’s mouth even long after the events and statements that his notes record. The fact that the editor of the volume, Percy Ernst Schramm, did not think it neces sary to elaborate and comment upon these changes and what they meant for the overall credibility and authenticity of the text also testifies to the lack of source [...]”
[1] Hitler Redux, p. 103
Кайра бөлүшүлгөн:
NS Heathenry
03.04.202505:35
"My "Mythus" now has a circulation of 250,000 copies, a success of the century. Rome has therefore mobilized all its forces and published "Studies on the Myth of the 20th Century" to "scientifically" finish me off. Written with well-known tricks, it is basically cheeky - and flimsy. I have already dictated 60 pages of retort. [...] Rome's counterattack should also have its answer. They have realized that everything is at stake now and that 2000 years of foreign overlay are being blown away. "Osservatore Romano" writes angrily that I am much more dangerous than the German Faith Movement. I believe that too, because on the level of the struggle for values, Rome's fight is no longer as promising as it once was. Roman Christianity is built on fear and humility, National Socialism on courage and pride. Now the Roman preachers even have to speak of the "heroic Christ" in order to keep up. Hopefully this new attempt at falsification by the pious gentlemen comes too late. The Great Upheaval has begun."
— Alfred Rosenberg, Diary entry for; December 26, 1934
Source: 1749-PS [Handwritten Alfred Rosenberg Diary for the 14 May, 1934 - 18 March, 1935 Time Period] p.58-59
@NSHeathenry
— Alfred Rosenberg, Diary entry for; December 26, 1934
Source: 1749-PS [Handwritten Alfred Rosenberg Diary for the 14 May, 1934 - 18 March, 1935 Time Period] p.58-59
[National Archives]@NSHeathenry
10.04.202522:16
FAIL
This quote is not a direct attack on Christianity or the Bible. Rather, Himmler references a biblical episod —the story of Esther—to construct a narrative about the so-called Jewish threat, in line with typical National Socialist ideology. The Bible is used as a historical source to support the idea that Jews have conspired against “Aryan” peoples since ancient times, in this case, the Persians. The intent is not to criticize the Christian religion, but to use a religious text to illustrate the Nationalsocialist vision of the “Jewish threat.” For this reason, reading the quote as an anti-Christian statement is misleading; therefore your interpretation represents a fundamental misreading of the quotation and a desperate attempt to twist his words.
Furthermore, it is known that Himmler had a particular fascination with the Bible, to the extent that he ordered the restoration of a 13th-century Bible to be kept at Wewelsburg Castle. [1]
In conclusion, with this post that you believed supported your argument, you have in fact demonstrated the opposite—showing how the Bible was actually central to Himmler’s life, as evidenced by his extensive knowledge of it and his inclusion of a biblical story in one of his most important theoretical writings.
SOURCE:
[1] NS 19/601
This quote is not a direct attack on Christianity or the Bible. Rather, Himmler references a biblical episod —the story of Esther—to construct a narrative about the so-called Jewish threat, in line with typical National Socialist ideology. The Bible is used as a historical source to support the idea that Jews have conspired against “Aryan” peoples since ancient times, in this case, the Persians. The intent is not to criticize the Christian religion, but to use a religious text to illustrate the Nationalsocialist vision of the “Jewish threat.” For this reason, reading the quote as an anti-Christian statement is misleading; therefore your interpretation represents a fundamental misreading of the quotation and a desperate attempt to twist his words.
Furthermore, it is known that Himmler had a particular fascination with the Bible, to the extent that he ordered the restoration of a 13th-century Bible to be kept at Wewelsburg Castle. [1]
In conclusion, with this post that you believed supported your argument, you have in fact demonstrated the opposite—showing how the Bible was actually central to Himmler’s life, as evidenced by his extensive knowledge of it and his inclusion of a biblical story in one of his most important theoretical writings.
SOURCE:
[1] NS 19/601
09.04.202507:13
Кайра бөлүшүлгөн:NS Heathenry
08.04.202523:02
Graves of SS men
All of which consist of the Germanic (Pagan) Rune of Life for each SS man that unfortunately died during WW2.
🔗
@NSHeathenry
All of which consist of the Germanic (Pagan) Rune of Life for each SS man that unfortunately died during WW2.
🔗
@NSHeathenry
Кайра бөлүшүлгөн:NS Heathenry
04.04.202521:12
Henry Picker's manuscripts that lead up the Table Talks are genuine
Hermann Mau had thus made perhaps the most important discoveries with regard to the history of the table talks. However, the true importance of these documents was not fully realized at the time. In a letter to Ritter from the summer of 1951 Mau wrote, almost offhandedly:
"By the way, I discovered some notes by [Heinrich] Heim from January/February 1942 in the Library of Congress. Some of them are not handed down by [Henry] Picker. A comparison of the transcripts printed in your edition with the Library of Congress manuscripts revealed – except for very few [dis] agreements – agreement."
[...]
In the eyes of the Athenäum Verlag, even though none of their representatives had actually seen the newly discovered documents, Mau’s find showed that Picker’s manuscript was genuine. The same was true for the documents that had been forthcoming from Switzerland, which obviously was a reference to Genoud. Now, the only way in which Genoud’s manuscript and the LoC pages confirmed that Picker’s text was “genuine” was that in the cases where they overlapped, which Athenäum at this point knew nothing about; thus, it corroborated that such notes had been made."
Source: Hitler Redux by Mikael Nilsson p.174-176
@NSHeathenry
Hermann Mau had thus made perhaps the most important discoveries with regard to the history of the table talks. However, the true importance of these documents was not fully realized at the time. In a letter to Ritter from the summer of 1951 Mau wrote, almost offhandedly:
"By the way, I discovered some notes by [Heinrich] Heim from January/February 1942 in the Library of Congress. Some of them are not handed down by [Henry] Picker. A comparison of the transcripts printed in your edition with the Library of Congress manuscripts revealed – except for very few [dis] agreements – agreement."
[...]
In the eyes of the Athenäum Verlag, even though none of their representatives had actually seen the newly discovered documents, Mau’s find showed that Picker’s manuscript was genuine. The same was true for the documents that had been forthcoming from Switzerland, which obviously was a reference to Genoud. Now, the only way in which Genoud’s manuscript and the LoC pages confirmed that Picker’s text was “genuine” was that in the cases where they overlapped, which Athenäum at this point knew nothing about; thus, it corroborated that such notes had been made."
Source: Hitler Redux by Mikael Nilsson p.174-176
@NSHeathenry
02.04.202515:30
SOURCES:
I (nr.1)
[1] Tomberg, F., Das Christentum ..., pp. 14, 115.
[2] Ibid., p. 17.
[3] Ibid., p. 64. The quality of this source has only recently been established.
[4] Ibid., p. 31.
[5] Cristianity in Hitler’s Ideology, p. 34. (The book can be found in PDF on our Telegram, where the link takes you to.)
[6] Christ on the Crooked Cross, Part I, p. 33.
II (nr.2)
[1] Tomberg, F., Das Christentum in Hitlers Weltanschauung, p. 127. Tomberg gets himself into trouble with this interpretation and claims that there was something very paradoxical about Hitler, who, in an effort to save Germany from the damaging effects of Christianity, was forced to portray himself as a true Christian and as a follower of Christ (ibid., p. 131). But with the interpretation presented in this book, there is no paradox to explain. It makes perfect sense.
[2] RSA IV/1, pp. 141–144, 148–149 (Documents 36 and 38). See also Tomberg, F., Das Christentum ..., p. 125.
[3] RSA IV/1, p. 159 (Document 39).
[4] See, e.g., Dierker, W., Himmlers Glaubenskrieger ...
[5] HRP I/1, p. 114 (June 22, 1932).
{This can also be found in "Christianity in Hitler's Ideology'' by Mikael Nilsson'' if you cannot find the sources}
I (nr.1)
[1] Tomberg, F., Das Christentum ..., pp. 14, 115.
[2] Ibid., p. 17.
[3] Ibid., p. 64. The quality of this source has only recently been established.
[4] Ibid., p. 31.
[5] Cristianity in Hitler’s Ideology, p. 34. (The book can be found in PDF on our Telegram, where the link takes you to.)
[6] Christ on the Crooked Cross, Part I, p. 33.
II (nr.2)
[1] Tomberg, F., Das Christentum in Hitlers Weltanschauung, p. 127. Tomberg gets himself into trouble with this interpretation and claims that there was something very paradoxical about Hitler, who, in an effort to save Germany from the damaging effects of Christianity, was forced to portray himself as a true Christian and as a follower of Christ (ibid., p. 131). But with the interpretation presented in this book, there is no paradox to explain. It makes perfect sense.
[2] RSA IV/1, pp. 141–144, 148–149 (Documents 36 and 38). See also Tomberg, F., Das Christentum ..., p. 125.
[3] RSA IV/1, p. 159 (Document 39).
[4] See, e.g., Dierker, W., Himmlers Glaubenskrieger ...
[5] HRP I/1, p. 114 (June 22, 1932).
{This can also be found in "Christianity in Hitler's Ideology'' by Mikael Nilsson'' if you cannot find the sources}
Кайра бөлүшүлгөн:NS Heathenry
10.04.202522:12
Purium
"The BIBLE gives us one of the historical examples of the radical annihilation of an Aryan folk by Bolshevik-Jewish methods. Read this a part of Jewish history where it is written that the Jews were distributed among the Persians, in all cities and villages and in the capitol Sufa. The Aryan Persians recognized the danger posed by these Jews. The will to solve the Jewish question in Persia was personified by Minister Haman. The king, who the Bible calls Ahasveros but who was really Xeres, was separated from his Persian wife Basthi by the extremely clever intrigue of the court Jews. The king was influenced by Jewish girls, especially by the Jewish harlot Esther."— SS defender against Bolshevism by Heinrich Himmler
@NSHeathenry
09.04.202507:13
The bombing of churches was STRICTLY PROHIBITED during the Spanish Civil War
The bombing raid carried out by the German Legion Condor on April 26, 1937, as allied support for Franco's Nationalist forces, was not a planned terror act or "test," yet that idea continues to be repeated today. From an article based on interviews of participants and surviving documents of the Luftwaffe specifically an unpublished history of tire Legion Condor from the year 1940 by Alfred de Zayas, published in the Journal of the Bundeswehr in 1974, we leam the following:
SOURCE:
[1] The Artist Within the Warlord: An Adolf Hitler You've Never Known, Page 80/81
The bombing raid carried out by the German Legion Condor on April 26, 1937, as allied support for Franco's Nationalist forces, was not a planned terror act or "test," yet that idea continues to be repeated today. From an article based on interviews of participants and surviving documents of the Luftwaffe specifically an unpublished history of tire Legion Condor from the year 1940 by Alfred de Zayas, published in the Journal of the Bundeswehr in 1974, we leam the following:
An air attack at the bridge and road crossing east of Guernica was ordered. All Condor orders were strict that cities must be spared, and most especially churches. (Knowing this, the "Rojas" [Reds] stored ammunition in churches, blowing them up when they couldn't get it out). Only in special cases were military targets in cities permitted to be attacked. [1]
SOURCE:
[1] The Artist Within the Warlord: An Adolf Hitler You've Never Known, Page 80/81
08.04.202518:11
The Führer attended as a witness at the wedding ceremony of his fortress comrade and now steadfast companion, Julius Schaub, held at St. Matthew's Church in Munich.
SOURCE:
Hitler’s adjutant Julius Schwab, In Hitlers Schatten pp. 104
SOURCE:
Hitler’s adjutant Julius Schwab, In Hitlers Schatten pp. 104
03.04.202511:22
Another source shows that Hitler considered "The Myth of the Twentieth Century" to be rubbish:
Source:
The Face of the Third Reich Page 199
Hitler found the book ‘derivative, pastiche, illogical rubbish! Bad Chamberlain with a few additions!’ At the same time he assured the author that it was ‘a very intelligent book’. During the war he admitted, moreover, that he ‘had read only very little of it’, because it was ‘written in too unintelligible a style’, and attributed its great popularity solely to its attacks on the Catholic Church. [1]
Source:
The Face of the Third Reich Page 199
02.04.202515:28
DID HITLER PRETEND TO BE CHRISTIAN?!
II (nr.2)
-Friedrich Tomberg nonetheless claims that Hitler never intended to strengthen his audiences in their Christian faith, and that is, of course, a correct conclusion if one with “Christian faith” refers to a modern-day Christian. But as we have seen, our understanding of what Christianity could mean has to be expanded in the case of Hitler and the National Socialists. Many of the National Socialists, including Hitler himself, considered themselves to be faithful Christians, and in that sense, it is entirely plausible to assume that Hitler indeed wished to strengthen the audiences in their Christian faith—that he even wanted them to be fanatical in their faith.
[1]
If Tomberg’s conclusion were true, then Hitler’s propaganda strategy would have been very irrational indeed, since there would have been a considerable risk that the audience would have believed his lies and become even more firmly entrenched in their Christian faith, thereby becoming even more difficult to recruit for the purposes of National Socialism. Hitler was not stupid enough to risk all his and the NSDAP’s propaganda success by spreading a false message to the party members and the voters that might be misinterpreted and used against him. It would have been like propagating a non-antisemitic message while wanting to pursue an antisemitic policy; such rhetoric would draw the wrong crowd and the wrong kind of supporters. Once again, Hitler’s actions are most easily explained if we simply take him at his word.
He clearly knew when to bring up religion and when not to do so. For example, he did not bring up religion at all when he spoke to members of the political, military, and economic elite in the National Klub von 1919 (National Club of 1919) in Hamburg on December 1, 1930, but, as we have already seen, he did do so when he spoke to the SS in Munich four days later. As we remember, he stated to the SS men that Christmas was a reminder of the immortal example of how even the smallest thing could grow big, “and today we may perhaps to us National Socialists with good reason confess that we serve religion more than the politicized servants of religion serve religion in that we do not mix it with politics, but in our political action promote principles for which Christ was once born and for which [he] was persecuted and nailed to the cross by the Jews” [emphasis added].
The gathered SS men then drenched Hitler in storming applause for his words. The battle was for the freedom of the German people’s soul, he proclaimed.
[2]
On December 7, he expressed the hope to an NSDAP gathering that “the Almighty and merciful God” would finally let the great moment arrive when the Germans would once again be elevated to honor and dignity.
[3]
It is really interesting that Hitler would stress Christ’s teachings to members of the SS of all people. The SS was, after all, the organization that was the most hostile toward the Christian churches after the NS revolution.
[4]
Hitler could not benefit from portraying the movement as a direct heir to Christ unless the SS men who were listening to him sympathized with the message and understood what he meant by that. Hitler appears to have refrained from emphasizing his religious faith in precisely the contexts where it would have served him extra well propagandistically, such as in interviews with foreign journalists.
In preparation for the election in July 1932, an appeal was published in the Völkischer Beobachter on June 22, in which Hitler stated his conviction that “God willing” the NSDAP would be able to form a government on August 1. Hitler thus ascribed to God an active role in German history in making him the savior of Germany. Hitler did not get to form his government in August, however. But he was not far off.
[5]
II (nr.2)
-Friedrich Tomberg nonetheless claims that Hitler never intended to strengthen his audiences in their Christian faith, and that is, of course, a correct conclusion if one with “Christian faith” refers to a modern-day Christian. But as we have seen, our understanding of what Christianity could mean has to be expanded in the case of Hitler and the National Socialists. Many of the National Socialists, including Hitler himself, considered themselves to be faithful Christians, and in that sense, it is entirely plausible to assume that Hitler indeed wished to strengthen the audiences in their Christian faith—that he even wanted them to be fanatical in their faith.
[1]
If Tomberg’s conclusion were true, then Hitler’s propaganda strategy would have been very irrational indeed, since there would have been a considerable risk that the audience would have believed his lies and become even more firmly entrenched in their Christian faith, thereby becoming even more difficult to recruit for the purposes of National Socialism. Hitler was not stupid enough to risk all his and the NSDAP’s propaganda success by spreading a false message to the party members and the voters that might be misinterpreted and used against him. It would have been like propagating a non-antisemitic message while wanting to pursue an antisemitic policy; such rhetoric would draw the wrong crowd and the wrong kind of supporters. Once again, Hitler’s actions are most easily explained if we simply take him at his word.
He clearly knew when to bring up religion and when not to do so. For example, he did not bring up religion at all when he spoke to members of the political, military, and economic elite in the National Klub von 1919 (National Club of 1919) in Hamburg on December 1, 1930, but, as we have already seen, he did do so when he spoke to the SS in Munich four days later. As we remember, he stated to the SS men that Christmas was a reminder of the immortal example of how even the smallest thing could grow big, “and today we may perhaps to us National Socialists with good reason confess that we serve religion more than the politicized servants of religion serve religion in that we do not mix it with politics, but in our political action promote principles for which Christ was once born and for which [he] was persecuted and nailed to the cross by the Jews” [emphasis added].
The gathered SS men then drenched Hitler in storming applause for his words. The battle was for the freedom of the German people’s soul, he proclaimed.
[2]
On December 7, he expressed the hope to an NSDAP gathering that “the Almighty and merciful God” would finally let the great moment arrive when the Germans would once again be elevated to honor and dignity.
[3]
It is really interesting that Hitler would stress Christ’s teachings to members of the SS of all people. The SS was, after all, the organization that was the most hostile toward the Christian churches after the NS revolution.
[4]
Hitler could not benefit from portraying the movement as a direct heir to Christ unless the SS men who were listening to him sympathized with the message and understood what he meant by that. Hitler appears to have refrained from emphasizing his religious faith in precisely the contexts where it would have served him extra well propagandistically, such as in interviews with foreign journalists.
In preparation for the election in July 1932, an appeal was published in the Völkischer Beobachter on June 22, in which Hitler stated his conviction that “God willing” the NSDAP would be able to form a government on August 1. Hitler thus ascribed to God an active role in German history in making him the savior of Germany. Hitler did not get to form his government in August, however. But he was not far off.
[5]
02.04.202505:38
HITLER AGAINST ROSENBERG'S TWENTIETH CENTURY MYTH
Alfred Rosenberg's Twentieth Century Myth is perhaps the most commonly cited source by NS Heathenry to shape the NSDAP more in their image. But what did Hitler and the NSDAP really think about this myth? Over the next few days, I will publish a series of short posts exploring this topic, with a final post summarizing everything. Let's begin today with Hitler:
SOURCE:
[1] Der Besuch Michael Kardinal von Faulhabers bei Adolf Hitler auf dem Obersalzberg im November 1936, Page 136
Alfred Rosenberg's Twentieth Century Myth is perhaps the most commonly cited source by NS Heathenry to shape the NSDAP more in their image. But what did Hitler and the NSDAP really think about this myth? Over the next few days, I will publish a series of short posts exploring this topic, with a final post summarizing everything. Let's begin today with Hitler:
It is certainly not possible to overcome a faith deeply rooted in the heart of the people with a myth. If only he had chosen another title! Only because the Episcopal Conference of Freising had warned against the book and, even more so, because the Church had placed it on the Index, sales skyrocketed, and the book was sold in hundreds of thousands of copies. Yet, in Germany, there are not even 10,000 people who truly understand it. [1]
SOURCE:
[1] Der Besuch Michael Kardinal von Faulhabers bei Adolf Hitler auf dem Obersalzberg im November 1936, Page 136
10.04.202505:33
Reinhard Heydrich was a devout Catholic
"In 1936 he (Reinhard Heydrich)
surprised me by confessing that he had left the Church. And at that moment I also confessed my sin to him. However, he left the Church for a completely different reason than I did. Despite our evangelical wedding, he remained a Catholic.
In his official or work activities, he encountered political Catholicism."
Lina Heidrich
Leben mit einem Kriegsverbrecher
pp 57-58
"In 1936 he (Reinhard Heydrich)
surprised me by confessing that he had left the Church. And at that moment I also confessed my sin to him. However, he left the Church for a completely different reason than I did. Despite our evangelical wedding, he remained a Catholic.
In his official or work activities, he encountered political Catholicism."
Lina Heidrich
Leben mit einem Kriegsverbrecher
pp 57-58
08.04.202523:07
06.04.202521:39
03.04.202505:39
Once again, the pagan Brazilians rely on a source whose reliability is virtually zero. However, setting this fact aside, the amusing aspect of this case is that Rosenberg’s statement about his myth is undoubtedly a reflection of his need to compensate for an unsuccessful political career. He sought solace in the belief that he had achieved philosophical success—an illusion, as this too was a failure. As Hitler himself claimed, there were not even ten thousand people capable of fully understanding its meaning.
From Joachim Fest’s book The Face of the Third Reich, we read:
Another important fact that is mentioned, and which will be useful for future posts, is that Rosenberg had little to no political influence:
SOURCE:
[1] My previous post
[2] The Face of the Third Reich Page 199
[3] The Face of the Third Reich Page 199
From Joachim Fest’s book The Face of the Third Reich, we read:
Among the public too it found few readers, though thanks to a sales campaign using every trick of the trade it had run to 1,100,000 copies by 1944. Rosenberg’s proud entry in his diary for 19 January 1940 that ‘gradually hundreds of thousands have been inwardly revolutionized by my book’ was no doubt an expression of his need to compensate for an unsuccessful political career by convincing himself of his philosophical success. [2]
Another important fact that is mentioned, and which will be useful for future posts, is that Rosenberg had little to no political influence:
For by this time it had long been
evident that Rosenberg had little
or no political influence and no voice in
the real decisions. [3]
SOURCE:
[1] My previous post
[2] The Face of the Third Reich Page 199
[3] The Face of the Third Reich Page 199
02.04.202515:28
DID HITLER PRETEND TO BE CHRISTIAN?!
I (nr.1)
This pagan accuses Hitler of ''trying to win votes from christian ppl but now they rlly think you're a christian''
And the "NSHeathenry'''s meme
HERE IS OUR RESPONSE:
Hitler frequently referenced Christianity in his speeches and writings, not just before coming to power but also afterward. In Mein Kampf (1925), he portrayed himself as doing God’s work by fighting against Jews, and he often spoke about divine providence guiding his actions. If he was merely pretending, why would he continue using religious rhetoric even after securing total power?
-Friedrich Tomberg has somewhat contradictorily claimed that while Hitler strove to “in a way” eradicate Christianity from history and replace the mainstream Christian view of Jesus with one where the latter had been transformed into an Aryan, Hitler also at the same time explicitly claimed that the NSDAP continued in “Jesus’ footsteps” with the intention of finally achieving the aim that Jesus had originally set for himself and the world. I write “contradictorily” because it is hard to understand why Hitler would have had any interest at all in turning Jesus the Jew into Jesus the Aryan if his intention was to eradicate Christianity.
[1]
VIEWING THIS AS A PROPAGANDA TRICK DESIGNED TO WIN OVER MILLIONS OF CHRISTIAN VOTERS TO THE SIDE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM DOES NOT HOLD WATER. If that was Hitler’s intention, then it would of course have been much easier, and less time-consuming, to simply adopt a mainstream Christian understanding of Jesus as a tool for getting away with that trick. The fact that Hitler had a divergent view of what Christianity really was, and of who Jesus was, and that National Socialism spent so much time and energy on trying to spread this view shows us that we should at least consider taking these claims seriously. Tomberg’s investigation is also flawed in the sense that he uses only a small fraction of the available modern scholarship about Hitler and National Socialism’s relationship to Christianity. This means that his conclusions are often dubious and untrustworthy.
In his book, Tomberg further undermines his own arguments by explicitly stating that he does not intend to show “what actually happened.” The book is instead intended to be a philosophical and literary interpretation, and he says that it is up to the historians to show whether the view that he presents is commensurate with reality. This attitude is also evident in the way that Tomberg treats his sources, which is almost completely void of source criticism, and the critical methods that he does apply are flawed and invalid.
[2]
For example, he refers to Tischgespräche without mentioning that the quality of this source had not been established at the time.
[3]
He uses Rauschning’s Gespräche mit Hitler (Conversations with Hitler) from 1940, even though he admits that historians do not think they are genuine; he apparently thinks that he can cite this source anyway because he “corroborates” what Rauschning says using “other” sources (it is unclear which sources he is referring to).[4]
Moreover, he refers to the so-called Bormann dictations (Tomberg is referring to Hitlers politisches Testament, or The Testament of Adolf Hitler), which are said to be continuations of the conversations in Tischgespräche, quoting them extensively, even though he has already noted that historians have doubted the veracity of this source too (I have since proven that these notes are forgeries).
[5]
On another occasion, he cites Hitler based on Dietrich Eckart’s book Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin (Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin) without mentioning that this is a fictional conversation fabricated by Eckart. We therefore cannot look to Tomberg to get a reliable description of Hitler’s ideas about Jesus and Christianity."
[6]
I (nr.1)
This pagan accuses Hitler of ''trying to win votes from christian ppl but now they rlly think you're a christian''
And the "NSHeathenry'''s meme
HERE IS OUR RESPONSE:
Hitler frequently referenced Christianity in his speeches and writings, not just before coming to power but also afterward. In Mein Kampf (1925), he portrayed himself as doing God’s work by fighting against Jews, and he often spoke about divine providence guiding his actions. If he was merely pretending, why would he continue using religious rhetoric even after securing total power?
-Friedrich Tomberg has somewhat contradictorily claimed that while Hitler strove to “in a way” eradicate Christianity from history and replace the mainstream Christian view of Jesus with one where the latter had been transformed into an Aryan, Hitler also at the same time explicitly claimed that the NSDAP continued in “Jesus’ footsteps” with the intention of finally achieving the aim that Jesus had originally set for himself and the world. I write “contradictorily” because it is hard to understand why Hitler would have had any interest at all in turning Jesus the Jew into Jesus the Aryan if his intention was to eradicate Christianity.
[1]
VIEWING THIS AS A PROPAGANDA TRICK DESIGNED TO WIN OVER MILLIONS OF CHRISTIAN VOTERS TO THE SIDE OF NATIONAL SOCIALISM DOES NOT HOLD WATER. If that was Hitler’s intention, then it would of course have been much easier, and less time-consuming, to simply adopt a mainstream Christian understanding of Jesus as a tool for getting away with that trick. The fact that Hitler had a divergent view of what Christianity really was, and of who Jesus was, and that National Socialism spent so much time and energy on trying to spread this view shows us that we should at least consider taking these claims seriously. Tomberg’s investigation is also flawed in the sense that he uses only a small fraction of the available modern scholarship about Hitler and National Socialism’s relationship to Christianity. This means that his conclusions are often dubious and untrustworthy.
In his book, Tomberg further undermines his own arguments by explicitly stating that he does not intend to show “what actually happened.” The book is instead intended to be a philosophical and literary interpretation, and he says that it is up to the historians to show whether the view that he presents is commensurate with reality. This attitude is also evident in the way that Tomberg treats his sources, which is almost completely void of source criticism, and the critical methods that he does apply are flawed and invalid.
[2]
For example, he refers to Tischgespräche without mentioning that the quality of this source had not been established at the time.
[3]
He uses Rauschning’s Gespräche mit Hitler (Conversations with Hitler) from 1940, even though he admits that historians do not think they are genuine; he apparently thinks that he can cite this source anyway because he “corroborates” what Rauschning says using “other” sources (it is unclear which sources he is referring to).[4]
Moreover, he refers to the so-called Bormann dictations (Tomberg is referring to Hitlers politisches Testament, or The Testament of Adolf Hitler), which are said to be continuations of the conversations in Tischgespräche, quoting them extensively, even though he has already noted that historians have doubted the veracity of this source too (I have since proven that these notes are forgeries).
[5]
On another occasion, he cites Hitler based on Dietrich Eckart’s book Der Bolschewismus von Moses bis Lenin (Bolshevism from Moses to Lenin) without mentioning that this is a fictional conversation fabricated by Eckart. We therefore cannot look to Tomberg to get a reliable description of Hitler’s ideas about Jesus and Christianity."
[6]
01.04.202516:52
[The OSS Black Reports]
Көрсөтүлдү 1 - 24 ичинде 87
Көбүрөөк функцияларды ачуу үчүн кириңиз.