Germany Was Groomed For The Holocaust By Evolution And Social Darwinism

Many in the West argue that murdering children through abortion is “a woman’s right”. Ask school aged children and you will find a large proportion are totally accepting of this excuse and some will admantly defend this heinous crime as morally sound.

Our society did not always believe this and so we need to understand how it is that we have come to willingly participate in the murder of approximately one fifth of the entire living human race  in the last century (yes, about one and a half billion people dead!)

Likewise, we should understand that Germany didn’t up and decide to gas millions of Jews and other undesirables on a whim – they were prepared by a century of philosophical indoctrination.

The doctrine in question is Darwinian evolution – the unproven idea that all life came from one form of life – and it’s logical social implication was that not all animals are equal: namely, white animals are superior.

This led the German nation under the leadership of avid naturalist Adolf Hitler down the road of eugenics – the improvement of humanity and the removal of the undesirable – which involved the murder of children, the disabled, and anyone who didn’t make the classification of “superior”, including but not limited to the Jews.

So while Martin Luther and others had given the Germans religious reasoning to dislike the Jews (through a false understanding of the bible – keep in mind Jesus is a Jew and therefore not so big on promoting anitsemetism), it was naturalism, evolution, social Darwinism, and eugenics that offered “scientific” reasoning for the extermination of the “sub-human” Jews.

The recent video from Creation Ministries International explores this process and its consequences:


America’s Use Of Atomic Bombs Is Evil But Ongoing Murder Of Millions of Children Through Abortion Is Righteous Freedom

We would have to be astounded at the logic of the left if it weren’t for the reality of sin and rebellion against God. It’s not about logic at all because it is all about defiance.

The ongoing re-education of society through school and the media has been pushing for the vilification of war for decades, especially the actions of the U.S. In using two atomic bombs on Japan in World War Two.

As the 70th anniversary of the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki has recently passed, the mainstream media are reminding us again and again how the U.S. was really only making a statement to the USSR and that the dripping of the bombs actually had no impact upon the Japanese regarding surrender, seeing the nuclear annihilation of two cities as no different to normal bombing runs.

Consider the way the ABC presents the history:

The world changed forever when a US bomber dropped the first atomic bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima 70 years ago.

The Americans said they took the drastic step to put an early end to World War II and save the lives of hundreds of thousands of US soldiers, but this official narrative is now being overturned.

On an interesting side note, the ABC are seemingly engaged in an endless “overturning” of official narratives, whether in promoting homosexuality as healthy and normal, its attacks on natural and historical marriage, its blurring of biological sex that defines men and women in philosophical theories about fluid gender identity, or in its refusal to mention more than a passing word about the catastrophic but unsurprising revelations about Planned Parenthood’s baby organ trafficking.

Back to their report though:

On August 6, 1945 the world’s first atomic bomb exploded over Hiroshima, wiping out the city centre and killing about 140,000 people by the years’ end.

Keiko Ogura was eight-years-old at the time and only 2.4 kilometres from the hypocentre.

She remembers being engulfed in flames.

“A flash of light and the blast slammed me to the ground and I lost consciousness,” she said.

“I woke up, it was dark and everyone was crying.”

Bomb survivor’s message of peace

Tomiko Matsumoto was 14 when an atomic bomb fell on Hiroshima. Seventy years later, she tells her story.

Keiko said the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and another at Nagasaki three days later, which killed 70,000 more, were war crimes.

Many historians say the bombings did not lead to the Japanese surrender, and the Soviet declaration of war on Japan two days later was a bigger shock.

It put an end to any hope the Soviets would negotiate a favourable surrender for Japan.

The severely-weakened Japanese Imperial army had no capacity to fight the Soviets on a second front in China and Northern Japan.

Japanese historian Yuki Tanaka said the country had no choice because the Soviets would have killed Emperor Hirohito, seen as the heart and soul of imperial Japan.

“The Soviet Union would demolish the emperor system and they would execute the emperor as well as all members of the royal family,” he said.

New bomb not responsible for Japan’s surrender

America believed the shock and awe of the devastating power of the new bombs would force Japan into surrender, but experts say inside Japan it was viewed differently.

The Americans had already destroyed 66 Japanese cities with a massive fire bombing campaign.

In just one night, 100,000 civilians were killed in Tokyo.

Tokyo’s Temple University director of Asian Studies Jeffery Kingston said the new bombs would not have had the impact the Americans would have hoped.

“If you look at it from the perspective of the Japanese military, it doesn’t really make a big difference whether people are dying from fire bombing or atomic bombs … it is [just] two additional city centres that are destroyed,” he said.

The atomic bombings probably did play a part in averting a bloody ground invasion and saving thousands of US lives, but historians like Dr Kinston said the bombs were also about sending a message to the Soviets.

“We have this incredible new weapon, we have a monopoly on it and we are going to emerge as the strongest superpower. In a sense, this was the opening salvo of the Cold War,” he said.

Survivor’s call for future free of nuclear weapons
On the eve of 70th anniversary, the children of Hiroshima sing for a future free of nuclear weapons, but today more countries than ever have the bomb.

America’s atomic attacks on Japan started a nuclear arms race which bought the world to the brink of destruction.

Hiroshima survivor Keiko Ogura wants people to come and see for themselves.

“Some people in the world still do not understand the cruelty of nuclear weapons, and that they are absolute evil. This surprises me. I want them to come to Hiroshima and Nagasaki,” she said.
Most historians agree the official version from the US government — that the bombs were dropped to force an early surrender and saved up to a million American lives from a bloody invasion — is far too simplistic.

Mr Tanaka said it was a criminal act under international law.

“Also, morally it was wrong. So they have to find some non-legal arguments to self-justify the conduct, that they annihilated 210,000 civilians,” he said.

The debate in academic circles now is how much other factors came into play in America becoming the first and still the only nation to drop the atomic bomb in warfare.

The contradictions and denial going on here is impressive, even for a media organisation that specialises in this kind of thing.

On the one hand they would have us believe that the atomic bombs achieved nothing different to normal firebombing:

In just one night, 100,000 civilians were killed in Tokyo.

If you look at it from the perspective of the Japanese military, it doesn’t really make a big difference whether people are dying from fire bombing or atomic bombs.

But then why is the atomic bomb so evil and not firebombing and bombing in general because they make a clear distinction:

Mr Tanaka said it was a criminal act under international law.

“Also, morally it was wrong. So they have to find some non-legal arguments to self-justify the conduct, that they annihilated 210,000 civilians,” he said.

Either the atomic bombs are different from other weapons, which would suggest that the Japanese did respond to the use of the bombs in spite of this report’s claim, or they are no different to other weapons and therefore cannot be considered uniquely cruel or evil as the report would have us believe.

So they want us to see atomic weapons as evil to push their nuclear proliferation goals but they also want to insist that atomic bombs had no part in ending the war because their impact is no greater than conventional warfare.

Which is it?

The more important questions remain unanswered:

  • Is war necessary and what if it is not avoidable?
  • Did the Japanese do horrendous evil, more so that other nations during war?
  • Who gets to define morality?

The answers are that sometimes, war is the only option. The Japanese were not going to just lay down and there is good evidence that a single bomb capable of destroying an entire city was reason enough to cease fighting, unless you agree with the revisionism above that nukes didn’t faze the Japanese at all.

By their own miserable worldview, the left make morality a subjective choice so it comes as no surprise that they fixate on the hundreds of thousands killed in Japan by the U.S. During a war but refuse to mention the 57 million babies murdered by abortion there during peacetime.

The double standards are excruciating!

The left love to push their anti-war stance because they refuse to see the necessity of war against empires that are quenched by no other means. They sincerely believe that enough education (see: re-education) will lead all people into the harmonious unity in the leftist ideology.

That why the West is in such a predicament with Islam, which believes that its religious ideology is superior to every other and will die violently to establish it across the world.

It’s also why the West was in such a predicament with the Japanese empire, which was motivated by a similar Shinto zeal manifest in emperor worship that led to suicide bombing and all manner of cruelty against friend and enemy alike.

The very same delusional thinking is why the left have fought so hard against the death penalty in favour of rehabilitation for heinous criminals, no matter the extent of their crimes.

And it’s their own worship of the self-absorbed individual that ensures abortion is mentioned rarely and only ever in a positive light.

Sometimes, the hard way of war is the only way a people will learn and while war is an evil, it is a necessary one.

That goes for both Islam and the left because this war is inevitable.

Daniel 2: The Islamic World & The Fourth Empire

Joel Richardson is the foremost voice proclaiming a Middle Eastern, Islamic World focussed interpretation of the prophetic scriptures in the bible. 

The fourth episode of Richardson’s show The Underground discusses the identity of the fourth kingdom described in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and Daniel’s interpretation described in chapter 2 of The Book Of Daniel.

You can watch it below:

<p><a href=”″>The Underground Episode 4: Daniel 2 and the Fourth Kingdom</a> from <a href=””>Joel Richardson</a> on <a href=””>Vimeo</a&gt;.</p>

The Islamic world certainly seems to fit the biblical descriptions of the antichrist empire, from its origins in destruction and cultural suplantation to its inherent interaction division between Shia and Sunni.

Regardless, it is essential that Christians understand the key arguments regarding the end of the age so that we can faithfully watch and pray, being a light to others as we see all these things unfold.