The book «Jesus and Hitler»
© Michael A. De Budyon
JESUS AND HITLER
© Translated and edited by Viktor Yuskovets
1. Prophets and precursors
4. The Apostles
7. The sympathies and antipathies
10. The deeds
Epilogue: The Formula of Christ
“IT IS THE GLORY OF GOD TO CONCEAL A THING: BUT THE HONOUR OF KINGS IS TO SEARCH OUT A MATTER”.
Proverbs 25, 2
The extent, to which Christianity has rooted itself into the public consciousness, can be measured by the simple fact that we, whatever our attitude towards this religion might be, still using the calendar, which has for its starting point the birth of Jesus Christ. And it seems this is Ok with most of people, which is at least strange. When one begins to study an ancient history, he gets to experience a certain psychological discomfort, related to the dealing with this counter wise conception of time. On one hand, there is a continuous development, cultural exultation, perfection in forms, skills and knowledge, heyday of all sciences -on the other, this “counter wise countdown”, which usually precedes the launch of a missile or the test of a nuclear weapon. It turns the historical process inside out, creating the illusion of a “time disappearance”.
Ask anyone a question: what year was the Jesus Christ born? The probability of getting a now. It appears that Christ was born beyond time, in year “0”. His birth has inaugurated the beginning of the end, of what in the age of overwhelming domination of Christianity – Middle Ages, will be referred to as “golden age”, referred by hundred percent Christians. Such was the conclusion of the First Coming.
The Second Coming of the Christ is being expected long and hard. The expression “until the Second Coming” became a popular saying. In all probability, there is only one character, whose coming is anticipated with even greater anxiety – the Antichrist. It is a quite understandable. The Antichrist is expected to bring a universal horror. What is going to bring the Second Coming of a Christ nobody really knows, and the theologists are no exception, in this respect. Logically, in order to shine some light on this matter, one has to analyze the consequences of his First Coming in most inclusive manner. Whatever frightening the figure of hypothetical Antichrist might appear to us, still, his alleged deeds in the future are nothing more then a fictional fantasies. At the same time, our knowledge of “Savior’s” doings is more than real.
According to the understanding of the most Christians, prior to Jesus’ Second coming, there is going to be short, but filled with events era, so called Turbulence. The Antichrist is going to emerge here on Earth, acting as a supreme seducer, to attract the great majority of people for the purpose of leading them to hell. Then, in most pinnacle moment, the authentic messiah -Christ, must come down from the sky, and as if playing, he will destroy Satan and establish the eternal state of harmony, love and justice on Earth. Namely this scenario and nothing else must be a result of Jesus reappearance. At any case, there are no even slightest hints in any Christian sources, regarding his possible Third Coming. Let us be lenient towards Christians’ inability to logically develop it’s own doctrine. The minds of normal people can be described as bipolar , while “true believers” generally think in unipolar manner, and that is exactly what caused the notion of Trinity to be in the first place. Three in one. One in three.
by the findings of philosophers, scientists and engineers, who were inventing the “devil’s machines” and even by those, who were suppose to protect it from harmful influences – professors of theology and Christian leaders such as Jan Hus, Martin Luther, patriarch Nikon, even though, they were just carrying on of what was started at Seventh Synod at Nicea, when the dogma of Holy icons’ veneration was introduced, violating its delusive monotheism. By dividing Christian land between patriarchs of Rome, Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem, the Christianity has organized itself into the system, which was structurally doomed for slow and painful self annihilation.
It would be illogical if the project, on such scale, had ended up quietly, considering an amount of effort, that was being applied to Christianize Europe. How many wars had to be fought, how many corpses had to be piled up! The pagan Gods of Moloch, Val and Saturn with their petty human sacrifices cannot even stand comparison to the atrocities that were committed in the name of this scrawny little man, nailed to the cross. In the end, he eat not only them, but also thousands of other more or less bloodthirsty deities. And if we talk of Antichrist era, supposing its potential possibility, it appears that its beginning has collided with Jesus’ first coming. We need to remember that, according to the Christian notions – Devil is an entity who tends toward self-annihilation, also destroying, those who are involved in his schemes. Let us evaluate the Christianity from this point of view.
It started with seemingly harmless sermons of a bum, without definite occupancy, in a remote province of Roman Empire and looked like, it did not have a chance for success. But the series of a favorable circumstances, mainly intellectual decline of a Roman elite and the convergence of an Asiatic elements into the Roman society, had made possible something utterly improbable: Romans, patricians started getting intrigued by such an original concept. Anything can be done out of bellyful idleness! It looks like that in Rome, at this time, was a fashion for eastern exotic, just like nowadays. By the time Christianity had spread out among wealthy patricians, Christians banned any other religions under the fear of death, that is to say, that formally declaring a complete non involvement in laws of genesis, it is not hard to figure out, that the Christianity could only maintain its continuous proliferation for as long as there were a plenty of potential converts within its reach. While Christians were “working” in Europe, in 632 A.D. the new religion of Islam had sprung out from the East, which automatically locked them up in European mainland. The last geopolitical gain of Christianity was Russia, being completely overran by 1000 A.D., but this wat it. Bravo Jesus! You had won, but this is where heroic period ends and starts self-destruction.
The year 1054 is known to us as the year of a Great Schism. It divides two Christian worlds, whose strategic goals from then on, would become a mutual obliteration. Shortly after this, we have seven Crusades (without the ill famed Children’s Crusade). The forth Crusade results in evisceration of a “Second Rome”-Constantinople, by the Catholics. Parallel to this, the Christians are being killed by the Arabs in Spain, Mongols in Russia, Turks in the Balkans. Thousand years of an endless, bloody bacchanalia. The term “Middle Ages” became the synonym of “horror”, still, this is a time when Christianity was at its strongest. We don’t how long the “era of Antichrist” is going to last, if ever, but it is most likely, that we will not even notice its beginning, after two thousand years era of Crist’s reign.
But this book is not just about Jesus; it’s also about the man, who is considered to be the embodiment of Evil. The time stretch for his earthly deeds, just as with Christ, was very and very short. For his adherents, he, just as Christ, was an incarnation of God. Analyzing the lives of each, it’s hard not to notice that they both were able to impress the great masses of people to the degree, which no other political or religious leader had ever accomplished. The elimination of any structure also means the elimination of conditions, which caused this structure to exist in the first place. And if we go further and suggest, that the Jesus’ second coming is still making some sense, then this sense must be in providing conditions for the end of Christian era, the proximity of which is perceived by more and more people. The name of the man, who had accomplished it, is Adolph Hitler. His whole life is from Gospels. But even more then that -the social outcome of a Jesus activity, that was being felt in the first fifty years after his death, is identical to the one that we see fifty years after the death of Hitler.
Jesus came to mix everything up into one monogamous blend. Greek and Roman ideals of beauty and perfection, embodied in their sculptures (almost all of them were destroyed by Christians), yielded to midgets, hunchbacks, madmen and impotents, whose motto was: no washing, no shaving, no marrying, no working. The same thing happened in the intellectual domain, as well. The ancient science, in most of its notions a veritable science, was replaced by so many pseudo sciences, that their brief survey would represent an encyclopedic task. Very hard and difficult was for the science to break out of Christian imprisonment. The number of an intellectuals, killed by church, many times overextends the number of different sorts of Saints and Holy men, who were killed, mostly under accidental circumstances.
Hitler came to separate everything. Races – for superior and inferior. Art – for healthy and degenerative, he made an unprecedented attempt to fuse the ancient ideals with the realities of twentieth century and what is most important: with his whole doctrine, he demonstrated an absolute absurdity of a Christian vision of life. Hitler had mortally wounded the communism, which was nothing but the agony of Christianity, being established in most Christian of all countries, Russia. But if Jesus lacked the time to mix, Hitler, on the other hand, lacked the time to divide. Nevertheless, we must return to the origins, in order to better understand of what do the lives of both of these men signify for the humankind.
Prophets and precursors
“My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me”
Jesus (John 7, 16).
“Their aim has often been for centuries the Inner longing of hundreds of thousands, until one man stands up to proclaim such a general will…” Hitler (Mein Kampf 1, 12).
The person of a global magnitude never emerge suddenly, without regard to the sphere, where he will actualize itself, whether we talk about poetry, music, religion or politics. For such an appearance a strong foundation is needed. And this foundation are those people, who prepare the ground for the person, whose forthcoming, is greatly anticipated by masses. The prophet’s goal is not to indoctrinate people in any way, but to psychologically disarm them and to make them more spiritually susceptible. The prophet and the leader might know each other personally, but it’s not always the case.
Regarding the prophets of Jesus Christ, let me to remind, that the whole New Testament is formed as if some kind of sequel to the Old one, that is why in the sayings of an Old Testament characters’, the hints were being found, which allegedly point out at the coming of a “saviour”.
Six hundred years, prior to his birth, Isaiah had prophesied that: “…a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call is name Immanuel”(Isaiah 7, 14). This prophesy is being quoted by Christians, as the most clear one, but even if it does shine some light onto the birth of Jesus, it is necessary to admit, that Isaiah had been envisioning a totally different type of Messiah. The rest of prophecies are so outstretched and unclear, that they can be used to describe just about anything. For example, prophet Haggai, had predicted that “The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the forme” (Haggai 2, 9). In the Christian literature this “prophesy” is always come with a comment: ”Because that is where Jesus spoke”. The Malachi had foreseen that there was going to be a prophet
true believers. John the Baptist is being referred to as an incarnation of prophet Elijah, even though that he used to emphasize many times: “I’m not Elijah”.
Swallowing of the prophet Jonah by whale is being compared to Jesus’ three days in the “kingdom of dead”, between his death and resurrection. The prophet Zechariah had predicted the Messiah entering city of Jerusalem by riding the donkey (Zechariah 9, 9). But knowing about this, Jesus himself had previously prepared the donkey for his triumphal entry, making it look like a totally spontaneous occurrence (Mathew 21, 2). Thus, any references to the Old Testament, regarding the foreseen birth of Jesus, can only have any value as artificially created precedents. At one time, in Soviet Union it was generally accepted to quote from the works of Marx and Engel, in order to explain one or another Soviet social policies. Curiously enough, the needed quotation could almost always be found. One of Hitler’s ideological forerunners, philosopher Schopenhauer, used to advise reading an Old Testament in Greek or Hebrew, because then the reader would get a feel of complete absence of a New Testament spirit in it.
For us, there is no need in this analysis to estimate the depth of Jesus’ knowledge of a Judaic law. All that he knew were the Ten Commandments of Moses and a couple of prophesies, regarding the coming of the future Messiah, who at this time, was being awaited with much of an enthusiasm. This was it. Back than, this was a necessary minimum of knowledge for any child to be considered a literate . In this respect, the Pharisees’ refusal to believe that many people would believe in the “god news” becomes more than understandable.
There is only one immediate precursor of Jesus Christ that we know of – John the Baptist. He was a classic prophet, coming from the highest circles of society, which in the end, became a very reason for his death. He was well brought up, practiced fasting and always washed his hands before having every meal, something that Christ and his disciples lacked in the most appalling manner. His life can serve as a good illustration to the fact that every destructive doctrine starts from the top. Being on honey and locusts, as food. He was neither the religious revolutionary nor dissident. His outlook at life is not really known to us, even though it is quite probable that he belonged to the sect of Essenes. About Hitler’s predecessor we know much more. Hitler himself mentions one of them in his “Mein Kampf”: “I have dedicated the first volume of my work, those heroes who sacrificed themselves for us all with the clearest consciousness. They must forever recall the wavering and the weak to the fulfillment of his duty, a duty that they themselves in the best faith carried to its final consequence. And among them I want also to count that man, one of the best, who devoted his life to the awakening of his, our people, in his writings and his thoughts and finally in his deeds: Dietrich Eckart” (Mein Kampf 2, 15).
Still, it will not serve us good, if we do not continuously remember that Hitler, just as Christ, was being led by his mighty intuition more then by anything else. This intuition had its foundation in the enormously developed sense of imagination and overwhelming priority of a sensual approach to deal with life’s situations. That is why, on the inner level, they both were ready to percept the true importance of their prophets only throughout its own projection. This is a very important moment and it is being totally overlooked by Christ’ biographers, although the same cannot be said about Hitler.
It goes without saying that, while being a twelve year old boy, Hitler could understand, feel and know much more than the other boys of his age. But twelve years old is not the age when an individual is fully capable of distinguishing the real from virtual. He cannot yet separate the elements of a fairy tale from his own life, that is why the fairy tale for a child is the most convenient way to percept the reality. The man, who had created such a fairyland for Hitler was Richard Wagner (1813-1883), whose operas played such an important role in forming young Adolph’s vision of world.
“At the age of twelve, I saw … the first opera of my life, Lohengrin. In one instant I was addicted. My youthful enthusiasm for the Bayreuth Master knew no bounds” (Mein Kampf 1, 3). Hitler remained “programmed” by the Wagnerian motives until his very end; we will get back to this thesis
fact that psychologically, he was a combination of semi mythical medieval characters throughout his life and even in death. He had something of a “Dutchmann” in him, especially in his relation with women, something of “Tannhäuser” (his trip to Rome, which impressed him beyond the measure plus neopaganism), something of a “Lohengrin” and even his conception of mutual suicide, committed together with Eva Braun, was borrowed from “Tristan and Isolde”. There is only one opera, that cannot serve as an analogy to Hitler’s life – “ Die Meistersinger Von Nurnberg”. But in the “The Ring of the Nibelung” and even more in “Gotterdamerung” – Hitler is a typical Sigfried. The characters of Wagner’s operas served Hitler in the same way as those of Old Testament served Christianity. And just as for almost any episode of the New Testament there is always an interpretation in the Old one; every important moment of Hitler’s life can find its parallel in the operas of Wagner. The last opera, seen by Hitler was “Parsifal”. Namely this piece was the reason for Friedrich Nietzsche to break up with Wagner, because in it the “Old Cagliostro” had capitulated to Christianity, in his eyes. This opera had shaken Hitler to the depth of his soul: “I will create a new religion, the religion of Parsifal” he declared, after his pilgrimage to Bayreuth. These were not just an empty words. There was a special squad within the SS, which up until the last days of the Third Reich, never stopped searching for the Holy Grail , because of Hitler’s personal order. In his conversations, Hitler emphasized the importance of Wagner’s operas to him, every time he had a chance: “In your lifetime, you used to hear the music of Richard Wagner. After your death, it will be nothing but hallelujahs, the waving of palms, children of an age for the feeding-bottle, and hoary old men” (Hitler’s Table Talk, December 13, 1941).
Our study cannot avoid mentioning the relationship between Hitler’s forerunners and the Christianity itself. Here we get to see a very interesting phenomenon. All of them, without the exception, were the spiritual children of Christianity. Even those who during their lives had deviated
from it at some point, had in the end returned to it in more or less obvious form.
of the Biblical characters were being used in his works much more often then those of ancient Greece and Rome is very demonstrative.
Houston Chamberlain (1855 – 1927), who after his conversion into National-Socialism, at almost seventy years old, nevertheless remained a faithful Christian, right to his death. Undoubtedly an intellectual, an admirer of Nietzsche and Wagner, he wrote a book that became famous in his time “Foundations of the Nineteenth Century”, where panegyrics to the Aryan race are being alternated by the accusations of an international Jewry. In this book, he was facing a seemingly impossible problem
– to unite three incompatible things: highest Aryan virtues, harmful influence of Jews and the Jewishness of Jesus himself, who he considered to be the “greatest man ever lived”. But that is where his own Englishman’s genes came in handy – the peculiar blend of pragmatism and positivism. Chamberlain simply declared Jesus being an Aryan! His absolutely groundless suggestion was also applied to the king David, who was called an Aryan as well. Even though, it is most likely that Hitler had never read Chamberlain’s book, from their conversations he adopted this strange conviction: ”Jesus was an Aryan” (Hitler’s Table Talk, December 13, 1941).
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900), this most efficient intellectual bomber of Christianity, the author of the best atheist pamphlet “Antichrist”, had also proven himself of being unable to rid his conscience from Christian fables. In its essence, the deeds of his Zarathustra are nothing else but the model of Jesus’ behavior, after resurrection, if he had not risen to heaven so hurriedly. It is worth mentioning that “So spoke Zarathustra” was Hitler’s the most favorite book. When Nietzsche’s mental illness became irreversible, everybody had a chance to see what he subconsciously thought of himself. His last letters he used to sign: “Crucified”.
was also able to combine his extreme racist views with an ideological legacy of Christ. He spent six years, living in abbey Heiligen Kreuz, as a monk, and after being excommunicated from there, converted to Protestantism. Despite this, in his numerous writings Lanz had suggested such methods of cleansing the Aryan world from the inferior races as turning them into the slaves, forcible sterilization, etc. -that is to say, things, deeply contradictory to the Christian principles. All his works are saturated with quotations from the Old and New Testaments.
There was one more man, whose name we should mention here – Otto Weininger. Hitler speaks of him in his “Table Talks” with a great deal of respect, even though that Weininger was a hundred percent Jew. Because Weininger’s “Sex and Character” was probably the most popular book among the intellectuals in the first decade of twentieth century, there is very little doubt that Hitler had read it, especially given the fact that this study engaged in a topic, which always fascinated him – the relations between genders. In Chapter 11 of his “Mein Kampf”, Hitler copies without the exception every single conclusion regarding Jews, that were being made earlier by Weininger in his book, in chapter “Jewry”.
While reading the Gospels, it cannot escape our attention that Jesus and John the Baptist appear to be related. On the other hand, Hitler’s precursors and himself were not relatives. Although, Wagner thought of Schopenhauer as a greatest thinker and was expressing his philosophy with its music. Nietzsche was a disciple of Schopenhauer and Wagner. Chamberlain had generalized the views of Wagner and Nietzsche, Weininger – those of Schopenhauer and Wagner, Jorg Lanz – those of Wagner, Nietzsche and Christ. From this prospective, it becomes obvious that all of Hitler’s forerunners were intellectual kinsmen to each other.
After having observed all this, it becomes clear that the prophets of a coming antichristian era, whether realizing it or, remained in Christian spiritual captivity. It must be noted, that intellectually, both Jesus and Hitler remained way behind their precursors. The Hebrew prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel came from the very top of their societies, their bloodline was directly related to royal families and clergy.
Others, who were socially closer to Jesus — Elisei, Illaiah and Iona, had distinguished themselves with a much higher degree of radicalism, even though they possessed enough of a common sense not to go after “king’s” title. Hitler’s forerunners, in its turn, were also a very educated people. Wagner, besides being a musical genius, was fluent in ancient Greek language and had an extensive knowledge of ancient Greek literature. He also was an expert in a sphere of medieval history and culture. The rest of them – Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, Chamberlain, Gobino, and Jörg Lanz were nothing less of a cultural elite of their time.
In the more general sense, it is a permissible to say, that both Hitler and Jesus were the final products of the ideas that were being in development for at least couple of centuries before their coming. Regarding the Hitler, it is more than obvious that he had never came up with an original ideas. Whatever he used to say was being said before him by his prophets, usually in more extreme manner. Unfortunately, there is very little known about the social life in Judea from the time of restoration of Second Temple until the birth of Jesus Christ. The works of such writers as Joseph Flavius tells us of external aspects of this life, but we are more interested in the inner ones. Still, using a few standard epistemological methods, allows us an approach to the understanding of how unconscious masses evolved form the period when being brought to Jerusalem by Ezra, to the time when Jesus entered this city as “king”.
There is one condition for the religious prophets to gain popularity and the social acceptance – alienation between lower classes and the religious authority. We cannot see even a potential prophets in the first centuries of “catacomb Christianity” for the simple reason that there was no social ground for their appearance yet. The boundary between laics and clergy, between “papas” and “believers” was very thin. There are plenty of an illustrative examples: St. Augustin was converted to Christianity when he was about 30, only after sixty years since it became an official Roman religion. In the end, he was given a status of “Church’s father” with his authority in Catholicism still remaining unshakable. When the religion is on the rise, even an intellectual can feel quite comfortable, being embraced by it, because it gives him a chance to make his talent applicable. Judea, in time of a Christ, was a society, where profundity between the clergy and common people had reached a disproportionate immensity. The big part in it played the fact of clergyman office being a hereditary institution, at the time. Only the the members of Levite tribe could serve as priests. Even than, the Moses Law could not embrace all of the aspects of social activity, creating a precedent for its lose interpretation, which was making the masses even more puzzled. Spiritually, the German society at the beginning of twentieth century, was very closely resembling the Judaic society two thousand years before, it was ripened for the “messiah”, who would subjugate the ideas and their material manifestations, who would give people the sense of being in control. Still, the effects of Hitler’s and Jesus’ ideas on our civilization would have been greatly diminished if the same social mood had not been a dominant in the neighboring countries, which in its turn, explains the ease with which these countries were being converted to Christianity and European countries militarily occupied by Hitler’s army. It was being noticed since that the “messiahs” only come in right time. And they surely do.
“If any [man] come to me, and hate not his
father, and mother, and wife, and
children, and brethren, and sisters, yea,
and his own life also, he cannot be my
Jesus (Luke 14-26).
“My mother, for example, would have cut a
poor figure in the society of our
husband and children. They were her entire universe. But she gave a great son to Germany”
Hitler (Hitler Table Talk. 10. 03. 1942)
To our great pity, we do not know the exact time when Jesus Christ was born. In the Gospels, this question is passed around. There was an event, which could help us to establish more or less accurate date of his birth I refer to the census of population in eastern provinces of a Roman empire, which was done by the order of Augustus. But again, there is no mention of such census neither in Roman nor in Judaic sources of a time. It was year 3760, since creation of Universe in Judea, year 776 since the first Olympics, year 750 since founding the city in Rome. The date of Hitler’s birthday is known good enough – April 20, 1889 and there are documents that prove it. But both, Hitler and Jesus, have a very similar family linage, which in both cases is very foggy and obscure. This is a necessary attribute of every person, throughout the history, that had an influence on the minds of a great number of people.
About Jesus’ mother we have almost no factual information. The official Church is being guided by, so called, “holy tradition” on this matter, i.e. by oral tale, being recorded much later, after the actual events. According to “holy tradition”, Mary was the only child of pious Joachim and Anna. The both spouses were elder at the time of Mary’s birth, which they took as a sign of God’s blessing. Being sanctified to God, in accordance to the Jewish tradition, Mary had vowed to remained a virgin, but upon reaching the age of 14, because of the same tradition, she was engaged to an old geezer Joseph, who was suppose to guard he virginity. Joseph was 80 years old at the time. His pedigree derived from the tribe of Davida (Matt. 1, 1-8;
There is much more data is available about the mother of Hitler, Clara Peltzl. She was born in 1860 and while being 20 years old, she married Alois Schicklgruber, who was almost 50 and who had been married twice, prior to that. Considering the Joseph’s age of 80, we can conclude almost for certain, that his marriage was not his first either. It is remarkable, that both Aloiz and Clara were coming from the same little village of Waldviertel and Clara’s great grandfather was grandfather to Aloiz i.e. they were relatives in the third degree, even though the Catholic church only allows marriages between people who are not related closer than the fourth degree. Anyway, just after having arranged their marriage, Maria immediately informs Josef that she is pregnant: “Mary was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost. Then Joseph her husband, being a just [man,] and not willing to make her a public example, was minded to put her away privily” (Matt. 1, 18-19). After nine months she gave birth to Jesus.
Due course to the Judaic law, established by Moses, every firstborn in Israel was to be consecrated to God, therefore on the fortieth day after its birth, the little Jesus was taken to the synagogue, where the sheep or the couple of pigeons had to be sacrificed, as a symbol of redemption. Ever since than, Josef and Maria used to take Jesus to the church as often as they could.
Unlike Jesus, Adolph Hitler was a fourth child in the family, but his two older brothers and a sister had died, before he was born. We know a precise time of his birth – 6.30 pm. Seemingly an insignificant detail. But if we assume, that Jesus was born on December 25, than it becomes possible for us to conclude that the time of his birth was the same with Jesus. Gospels tell us about the star over the shepherd’s cave (Matt..2, 2), where Maria went into her labor. At this time of year, on the latitude of Bethlehem, 6.30 pm is a time of dusk, when first stars appear on the sky. For the rational type of mind, things like a time of someone’s birth, are not relevant, but the astrologists have a quite different opinion on this matter. One cannot help wondering, why the evangelists – the easterners, with a high esteem for the astrology running in their blood, did not record the exact time of Jesus’ birth. It is most likely that Jesus wanted to keep it in secret for some
In a same way as Maria, Clara Peltzl had decided to consecrate her only survived child to God. While being eight years old, Adolph was sent to school, run by the Benediction monks, this was supposed to help him in becoming a priest in the future. He even used to sing in church’s choir. However, soon Hitler was expelled from the school, some rumors say this is because he got caught smoking a cigarette.
The place of birth stands next in our comparative analysis. Jesus’ ancestors were from Galilean town of Nazareth. This is where Jesus would have been born, if it was not up to the Census, which the Roman authority had suddenly came up with. Some Gnostics suggest that this was being done on purpose, so that the prophesy of Micah (Mic. 5, 2), who predicted the Messiah to be born in Bethlehem, could come true. By that time, between Judea, on one hand, and Galilea and Samaria, on the other, the feeling of an estrangement was on the rise. The death of Solomon and taking over the throne by his son Roboam had marked its beginning, when kingdom was divided on Judea and Israel. Most of a time, these two kingdoms spent in war with each other. These disaccords, on the ground of religion, had gradually caused Jews, in whose boundaries was the Temple of Jerusalem, to think of Samaritans as pagans. Moreover, any contacts between the citizens of these two states were considered unacceptable. The situation had been seriously worsen by the Assyrian king Salmanasar, who in 722 year B.C. destroyed the kingdom of Israel and resettled the majority of its people in different parts of his empire and by the Navuhodonosor, the king of Babylon, who ruined the Jerusalem, having enslaved a thousands of Jews. After a while, both Jews and Samaritans had returned to their lands, but by that time they were a people, who spoke in different, though similar languages and who had a different religious concepts. Samaria with Galilee, as its part, had its own Roman tetrarch and thought of themselves as a separate entities. Still, there were some people in Samaria, who followed the Judaic religious canons. They used to travel to Jerusalem every year as pilgrims. Such were the parents of Jesus.
destiny appointed Braunau-on-the-Inn to be my birthplace. For that little town is situated just on the frontier between those two States the reunion of which seems, at least to us of the younger generation, a task to which we should devote our lives and in the pursuit of which every possible means should be employed” (Mein Kampf 1, 1). The relations between Austro-Hungary and Germany, at the time, in many respects, resembled those of Samaria and Judea, two thousands years ago. These two countries had also fought many wars; the last of them ended in 1866. The Gabsburg’s empire was a polietnical formation, where out of 55 million citizens, only 9 million were actually Germans. Every year, from beginning of the century until the First World War, in Austria, was signified with an increase of political instability and with raising of nationalist feelings among its subjects. Let us not forget, that in a religious sense, these states represented a noticeable contrast with each other. In Germany, more than a half of the population were Protestants, while in Austria, the Catholics were in dominant position, along with various Orthodox and Uniat confessions. It seems, the fact of Hitler being born in a Catholic family, was a matter of a personal psychological inconvenience for him, because most of the great Germans, throughout the history, were Protestant. In his later years, Hitler will be known to target mainly the Catholicism in his antichristian remarks.
The social circumstances of Hitler’s and Christ’ upbringing were again almost identical. Mary and Clara were typical housewives. It was said about Hitler’s mother: “There wasn’t anything, that could make her smile”. The same can be applied to Mary and there is no need to go far to obtain a proof -all it takes is to look at her depiction in a numerous of Christian icons. Josef, the “official” Jesus’ father was a carpenter (Mark. 6, 3), Aloiz, in his young years had studied to be a shoemaker. While being a customs official, he used to get drunk regularly and, at home, he behaved like a domestic tyrant. Both Hitler and Jesus used to help their fathers at work.
It is not known for sure, when Jesus felt destiny to be a “savior” for the first time. But there was going to do from the very beginning. The part of it was choosing Judea as land, where his message would be spread. Analogically, Hitler also had a plan. While being an Austrian by birth, he openly admits of his dislike of Austria: “As a logical consequence of these convictions, there arose in me a feeling of intense love for my German-Austrian home and a profound hatred for the Austrian State (MK 1, 1).
Here we deal with one of the standard psychological features of the real Messiahs – the ability to percept where their activity would be the most successful. The lives of Jesus and Hitler are the most outstanding examples of it. Had Jesus confined his activity only to Samaria and Hitler to Austria, it is most unlikely that we would know anything about them by now, because neither Samaria nor Austria were the states, that could have played any great historical role. That is to say, Austria had ceased to be such a state and Samaria never became one. Hitler, who during the war fought as a soldier in German army, had denounced his Austrian citizenship and only the necessity to participate in elections to the Reichstag in 1929, forced him to become a German citizen. Jesus was a person without the citizenship, as well.
All prophets posses a very sharp sense of a real power, which they begin to exercise at very young age, yet analyzing their early years, disregarding any social aspects, will not help us much in our search for whatever set them on their course. The existence of Messiahs suggest the existence of the Baptists.
Jesus (Matt. 22, 14)
“Only the hero can become a leader”
Hitler (Mein Kampf. Volume 1, Ch. 11)
The previous two chapters dealt with historical aspects of Jesus’ and Hitler’s evolution, as characters, and it brought us finally to the most culminating point in their lives – the baptism by John the Baptist in the river of Jordan and joining the NSDAP, which came, when they both were a thirty years old.
There is a huge blanked out stretch in the life of Jesus – the period from when he was twelve to thirty years old. We may never be able to recreate the genesis of his thoughts, which elevated him from the son of a carpenter to almost a king.
All surviving apocryphal and academic biographies of Josef and Mary, emphasize their piety, but it looks doubtful that they could pass to Jesus any comprehensive knowledge of a Judaic religion, because, at this time, it was undergoing the process of inner destructuralization and the clergy was itself divided on sects of Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes and some time later later – Zealots.
Of course, all of them insisted on having in possession the only true version of their religion. The most powerful of these groups were the Pharisees. But, as it appears, ideologically, Jesus did not have much to do with either of them. Generally, the essence of his message consists of proclaiming himself the “Son of God”. Before him, it never occurred even to the greatest Judaic prophets and kings to act in a similar way. Evidently enough, such a thought could not emerge in his mind on its own. There had to
Jesus Christ did not know who was his real father. This question could not possibly leave him indifferent, just because of the prejudice toward illegitimate children, which was common in such patriarchal societies as Judea and Samaria, at that time. While being a little kid, Jesus had probably asked his mother many times: “Whose son am I?” or “From whom was I born?” and most likely was getting an answer: “From God, from God…” Well, some kind of an answer had to be given. There is also a possibility that by some freak accident; the date, time or place of Jesus’ birth could really coincide with those, predicted by the prophets. The little Jesus was probably also far ahead of his contemporaries, in its intellectual development, which left a mark on his personality, making him to act in a way he did. There are a lot of people out there, who think of themselves as “messengers of God” and maybe even his “sons”, but not many of them openly admit this, risking the possibility to spent the rest of their lives in a mental institution. Still, to speculate in this regard about the person, who does not show off any clinical symptoms cannot be very fruitful. What is important is that Jesus really thought that he was a “son of God”. There is an evidence, for those who read Bible carefully, that Jesus was gradually developing his belief in its own greatness. In Gospel of Luke (Luke. 4, 1620) there is an interesting episode of Jesus reading from the Book of Esaias in the temple of his native town of Nazareth: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised” (Esaias. 61, 1-2). It is absolutely obvious, that in this passage the Esaias was referring to himself, but Jesus comments: “This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears”, while humbly pointing out to his own person.
When we abstract from the cheer absurdity of Jesus’ concepts, than we would have to admit that structurally, they are well balanced. The very point of his whole life, in all details, was to make as many people as possible to believe, that he really was a Son of God. At he same time he was tormented Apostles over and over: “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? and getting a disappointing response: “Some [say that thou art] John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets” (Matt. 16, 13-16). The apostle Peter, trying not to traumatize Jesus, when being asked the same question, answered: “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God”. In return, Jesus delivered a panegyric to Peter. It is very easy to cater messiahs!
But this type of self-affirmative narcissism could not last for too long. The “Son of God”, needed a confirmation of his own status from the figure of authority. Such man was found soon. He was an educated hermit-prophet John, who liked to engage into the self-created rituals. As a matter of fact, John was looking for the man like Jesus, for whom it must have been a very unexpected turn of events, when John, after having momentarily evaluated the situation, said: “ I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?” (Matthew 3, 14).
This is how secret services recruit people to be spies; they exploit their own conceit. At this time, Jesus had barely reached the age of 30, wandering around the Judea until he had met John the Baptist.
In a same way Hitler, who was also 30 years old, used to roam the streets of Munich, while attending various political meetings. On September 12, 1919 he visited the gathering of an obscure German Workers Party, which took place in one of the Munich pubs: “I decided to attend the meeting of this Party, which had hitherto been entirely unknown to me. When I arrived that evening in the guest room of the former Sternecker Brewery – which has now become a place of historical significance for us – I found approximately 20–25 persons present, most of them belonging to the lower classes… When I returned to my room in the barracks that evening I had formed a definite opinion on this association and I was facing the most difficult problem of my life. Should I join this party or refuse?.. After two days of careful brooding and reflection I became convinced that I must declared myself ready to accept the membership tendered me by the German Labour Party and received a provisional certificate of membership. I was numbered seven” (Mein Kampf. Volume 1, Ch. 9).
Remarkably, Hitler wrote that he made a decision to become politician, while staying at the hospital, where he was transferred after being poisoned by the mustard gas, during the attempt to cross the river Ypres. Therefore, the water plays a symbolical role not just in Jesus’ baptism, but also in Hitler’s. The author of a brochure, which Hitler liked so much, was Anton Drexler (1884 – 1942). That was him, who played the role of John the Baptist for the future fuhrer. In his memories Drexler wrote later: “A grotesque little man became the member of our party number seven”. But it will only take Hitler a year to become an indisputable party’s leader, renaming it a National – Socialist Workers Party, while leaving only a nominal function of “honorary chairmen” to Drexler, who was absolutely deprived of any political ambitions.
Something similar took place in Judea, as well. John the Baptist was peacefully preaching about coming of the Messiah on the outskirts of Jerusalem, being ignored by most of the people. He didn’t perform miracles and resurrections, never healed anyone, and always used to emphasize that: “After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. (John 1, 30). He never built any long-lasting plans, when being asked about anything who is he, John used to answer rather vaguely: “I [am] the voice of one crying in the wilderness” (John 1, 23). He, just as Drexler, was aware, that he was not equal to the task and this is why he had to find a suitable candidate. John finds him in Jesus Christ. The Apostle John later wrote in his Gospel version: “The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world… And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water” (John 1, 29-31).
like this: “I did not know him, but he came to the pub “Sternecke” so that Germany could have an epiphany”.
As we have stated, there is a well-founded suggestion that John the Baptist belonged to the religious sect of Essenes. Drexler was also a member of sect, called: “Thule Society” (“Thule Gesselschaft”) and had among its members Dietrich Ekkart, Rudolph Hess and Alfred Rosenberg.
It’s hard to say for sure, whether Jesus lived up to John’s expectations. Once he sent two of his disciples to ask Jesus: “Art thou he that should come? or look we for another?” (Luke 7, 19). After being encrypted, this message reads: “Are you following our instructions or should we find another person?” At this time, Jesus was at such stage of his mission, that he could afford to answer whatever he wanted, or to ignore the question altogether, but he preferred to send back a report: “tell John what things ye have seen and heard; how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the gospel is preached” (Luke 7, 22). It appears that John got utterly disappointed in Jesus and, after some time, he had gotten himself involved in king’s Herodes Antippa domestic affairs, for what he paid with his head (Matthew 14, 1 – 11).
For the Drexler, who after one year from seeing Hitler for the first time, was being pushed by him into political shadow, the disillusionment came very fast, as well. While “doing time” in jail, after the failed November coup, Hitler mentions Drexler in his Mein Kampf without any resentfulness, but also without respect, just as Jesus might have thought of John the Baptist. “Herr Drexler, at that time chairman of the Munich local group, was a simple working man. He, too, was not of any great importance as a speaker. Moreover, he was not a soldier. He had never done military service, even during the War. So that this man who was feeble and diffident by nature had missed the only school
Ch. 12). Here is what Jesus had actually said to the people, who listened to John before: “What went ye out into the wilderness to see? A reed shaken with the wind? But what went ye out for to see?” (Matthew 11, 7 – 9). Clearly he did not need him anymore and to end any possible references to John the Baptist in future, which were so irritating to him, he announced: “But I have greater witness than [that] of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me” (John 5, 36).
After Hitler was released from the prison in 1924, Drexler turned openly critical to the fuhrer, but he was not a man capable of any active moves in this direction. He, just as John, had performed his mission by finding the one, who accomplished much more than he could ever do. The prophets’ disappointment in their “messiahs” is an explainable process; it is a side effect of their very human nature. They were exceptional individuals, but too humane, too down to Earth to become a “messiahs” themselves.
So, John saw the Christ. Christ saw John. Drexler saw Hitler. Hitler saw Drexler and the members of German Workers Party. Here we see a degree, to which the glance of a prophet differentiates from the glance of a regular person, because it seems that Hitler and Jesus could not have been more wrong individuals for the roles, which they have later. Look at the Judaic prophets of the Old Testament, those powerful man that were able to indoctrinate masses, without even having to speak to them. The Christ does not stand the comparison to them -little pitiful character of a subtitle physique, who reminds a dried out lizard more than a man, in whose actions we do not find anything, that would require even a minimal physical effort. Of course, Hitler possessed much more explosive temper, but still, from all that he had written and spoken about his wartime experiences, it is unclear whether he had actually killed anybody in a real physical way, whether he had ever pierced a man with a bayonet? In his external appearance, he definitely fell behind even Jesus, lacking every single his life. Yet, the substantive parameters do not affect “messiahs’” powers even in a slightest way.
© M.A. de Budyon
© Translated and edited by Viktor Yuskovets
© All rights reserved
All publication-related inquiries can be submitted to the following email address: firstname.lastname@example.org