History for Atheists

I find oversimplification of history to be annoying.   My favorite centers around Hitler.

You have ppl who label him a Christian, ppl who label him an Atheist, ppl who label him Pagan.

Christian: Despite the fact he met with and used Christian ministers/priests, that he was a lifelong member of Catholic church, in mein kampf and in Speer's book, he mocks Christianity openly.  Several of the condemned at Nuremberg seemed to celebrate Christmas. My vote. Not Christian.

Atheist? I think sources exist pointing to his superstitious beliefs. I think he believed in his destiny. My vote, not atheist. More evidence required.

Pagan? I think he loved that Pagan symbols were Germanic. Centered around his whole idea of Aryans connected to India. The swastika is a sun symbol, versions of it exist in Hinduism and Buddhism. Different angles, still basically the sun. More evide ce required. He certainly was fond of tge historic connection.

Pagan Christmas

FWIW, even if Christmas were largely pagan in origin, I don't think it would matter to modern practice. But more than being inaccurate, this kind of thing always seems to me like intellectual bullying - trying to tar someone's beloved idea with anything that might be taken as damaging, no matter how little sense it makes.

[Laird]

The Great Myths 16: The Conflict Between Science and Religion

From August 6, 2025.

The “Conflict Thesis” forms a kind of underlying historial metamyth that informs and undergirds a substantial amount of historial assumptions by anti-theist polemicists. This is the assumed and unquestioned idea that Science and Religion have been perpetually at war down the ages. Also known as the Draper-White Thesis or Warfare Model, it is a conception of the history of science that presents religion as the perpetual and consistent enemy of science, technology and progress. It is a pervasive idea in popular culture, despite the fact actual historians of science have long since rejected it as simplistic, misleading, ill-founded and inadequte. Despite this, most anti-religion polemicists simply assume it as fact and some have tried to argue against historians about it, with dismal results.