Is that an argument or a bumper sticker?
The only significant influence is the background of European state-church anti-semitism. As a consequence, he imbibed the general anti-Jewish attitudes of much of Europe. That's where it ends.
Hitler tried very hard to sever Christianity from its Jewish roots, going so far as to claim that Jesus was not Jewish. His religious imagination was fired by obsession with ancient european paganism mixed with a fascination with Hinduism which he mixed into his own esoteric religion. His vegetarianism extended form his flirtation with Hinduism. Erwin Lutzer's The Twisted Cross is a brief but excellent discussion of Hitlers's religious ideas.
At least someone here can express a rational opinion. The matter of what Hitler thought in private is not nearly as important as what he said to the public in order to gain and hold power.
I can recall seeing pictures of him surrounded by religious leaders and symbols. I don't recall seeing him surrounded by biology teachers.
The question is not whether he was hypocrite. The question is why nominal Christians responded to his bigotry.
I never said Hitler was right about Christianity, only that he was influenced by those who call themselves Christian Socialists led by Karl Lueger.
They twisted Christianity into something it wasn't, rather like the liberals are trying to do today, and for the same reason: power over Christians.
The point is, Hitler was influenced by a warped view of Christianity and perhaps by a warped view of Darwinism.
But neither Christianity nor evolution caused Hitler. Christianity is not based on hate, and evolution isn't based on genocide.
In all, it's risible to attempt to discredit either by argumentiam ad Hitleriam.