For all their “christianity”, republicans in the US are pretty hypocritical.
Jesus actually teached that everybody deserves to get fed and housed. That everybody deserves healthcare. That people should care for other people in their community. That is essentially the core principles of socialism.
And Jesus did reach down to the leper, but the leper was not cured, because his monthly deductables did not cover it.
“Get a job, hippy”, proclaimed Peter.
No no no. I see where you went wrong, you were thinking about Jesus from the bible, people dont really believe in him anymore. The Jesus followed today is Supply-Side Jesus, I know it gets confusing since they are both named Jesus.
The early Church is recorded as living that way:
"44 And all that believed were together, and had all things common; 45 And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. 46 ¶And they, continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, did eat their meat with gladness and singleness of heart, " ( Acts 2:44-46 KJV).
However, tearing a political philosophy away from its associated worldview leads to trouble.
This is one of the things I find strange about the political parties in the U.S. the Republican party, which seems to claim the majority of members who claim to be Christians, largely espouse a capitalist economic system. Capitalism is much more congruent with a Darwinist world view than a Christian one.
Meanwhile, the Democrat party, at least the more progressive wing, espouse more of a socialist system but seemingly oppose Christianity and claim a world view more congruent with a capitalist system.
Yeah that’s interesting. Though I do think the Bible is big enough and vague enough for either tribe to exploit. I’m convinced the Left could have sided with Jesus’s ways of life and been the Christian nation, while the right rejected it.
seemingly oppose Christianity
Christianity doesn’t even believe in Christianity. Behind the scenes in Churches, it’s bitter old people, angry at each other, shaking down patrons for cash, and selling peace to grieving people. Most Democrats want universal healthcare. They want, but are afraid of UBI, and would like it if they could keep their current advantage in the playing field, not becoming poorer while spreading change.
Lot of people during history fought for socialism but they always ignore that part somehow.
One of Marx’s biggest inspirations was the teachings of Jesus.
It is not really socialism since it is still based on a religious supernatural hierarchy and revelation and not any actual political theories as to how to achieve this without magic, but read literally, it is definitely closer to socialism than whatever basically all of the existing Christian denominations got out of it (with a few notable but not very popular exceptions).
And then Jesus said:
“Thou hast nothing to lose but thy chains! Take all the tools from those that dare to enslave thee and build thy own communities where all of you equally decide what to do!”
I’ve never heard this one before but it’s on the internet so Jesus must have said it. I will live my life by it.
bad look for socialism honestly
I always think of Jesus as a Buddhist Jew.
Socialism is an economic and political philosophy encompassing diverse economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production, as opposed to private ownership.
Socialist Jesus is
- anachronistic (property+ownership, private vs social don’t make much sense 2 kya),
- incongruent with most of Christianity and Socialism,
- propaganda.
Teached -> taught
The problem was that the church needed to reach out to the nobles to spread, so promising wealth became a sticking point
Jaques Elul was an interesting man. His book about Christianity and Anarchy is a must if you want to continue unrolling this thoughts
Socalism is about owning a share of your workplace. Its got nothing to do with free healthcare or caring for the community
Peace and love are not in man’s nature, regardless if you are a Christian or a Socialist, or both. “My god will fuck you up if I don’t get my money!”. That is the twist on capitalism.
Peace and love are not in man’s nature
That’s bullshit. Capitalism is what corrupts “man’s nature,” and it isn’t some kind of inherent thing to humanity.
You may be right.
Religion isn’t about actually helping people. It’s used to control the masses with shame, guilt and the threat of eternal damnation. It’s used to abuse and fleece the weak and the poor.
People holding onto “that’s not what Jesus would do” are just in denial about the cult they participate in.
Jesus is just a tool used to dupe rubes. If you need a fictional character to tell you to act like a decent human being then you’re not a good person.
You can’t call every christian a rube and then make such a simplistic accusation about organized religion. Yes there are (major) flaws with organized religion, but surely you realize your statement is at best hyperbole and at worst moronic
Dawg I ain’t saying organized religion is innocent. But it is false to claim that the sole purpose of religion is to control the masses. Your original comment was also just wrong like bruh, how can you claim that a figure like Jesus (the guy flipping tables in the marketplace, preaching ab how the poor are the most holy, saving the lepers, etc) was actually an evil psychopath who had a long game where he was going to fleece the poor of their wealth and threaten people with eternal damnation so they would follow him. That’s just some braindead conspiracy shit where you’re afraid everyone is out to get you. Grow up
Whatever jesus the human did in the past is irrelevant. He is used as an icon to control people by those who built an organized cult around him.
Why didn’t you start with that 😭 your original argument sounded so silly. Hell you could’ve said smtn interesting like how an originally innocuous scripture was co-opted for nefarious purposes but instead you just wanted to sound like an 8th grader who found r/atheism for the first time 💔
The over 100 upvotes say otherwise…
Religion is a cult that’s actively making the world a worse place.
“The over 100 upvotes say otherwise”🤓 grow up lmao
And buddy we literally agreed ab how scripture/prophets/religious ideas are often co-opted for power over a group of people.
I’m just tryna let you know that your argument sounded stupid lol. Try using specific evidence for arguments next time.
For example “religion is a cult…” is an awful start to an argument. 1) wtf is religion, that is a very broad term 2) the religion you’re mentioning is written in the singular, are you trying to say that all world religions are actually the same religion? 3) what about this (singular?) cult is actively making the world worse?
Instead try saying something like “Zionist politicians purposely mislead their constituents through well chosen scripture in order to garner support for the genocide of thousands.”
See how my statement was the effectively the same as your argument, but it uses more precise language and points to a specific modern day example.
Harsh but true.
But a little besides the point OP is trying to make - which is about Jesus’ teachings themselves, not the cult that grew up around it - as far as we can deduce what Jesus actually did and said of course. Which isn’t much but enough to come to a similar conclusion as OP claims.
Which is why he had to be made an example of and executed. It took a few hundred years for his brand to be perverted into funding a gilded palace in Rome.
IMO it made sense in the times when enforcing the law was harder to do. But a lot of time has passed since then, religions (as in whole communities, priests and followers) somehow made it their point to not change much
Constantine left a lot out to solidify his rule too.
“Enforcing the law” a.k.a. “opressing people”
Not necessarily. Punishing theft or manslaughter is not oppression. And it makes sense to have systemic safeguards against those
Why do people steal?
Not being able to cook and eat humans make some people feel oppressed, too, and it’s still the law. I think cultural context also matters. Jesus, if he existed as a singular person, was certainly ahead of his time, and imo, when he said he came to fulfill the law (old testament) rather than abolish it, that meant it was completed, thus over. It was time for a new law. Plus I’ve also done a lot of reading at early Jewish writings.com, earlychristianwritings.cim, the Ethiopian Bible in English, my Jewish learning.com, Jewish encyclopedia, etc, so there are a lot of mistranslation, too.
I would argue that the verse where he said I am here to fulfill the old testament is more proving that christians should follow the old testament. There is not much in bible canon to suggest the old testament was vetod by Jesus, I would say there’s more than enough evidence in bible canon that old testament rules still apply to all christians.
Almost everything Jesus taught was in contradiction to the ot.
“Do not think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I did not come to abolish but to fulfill”
When you fulfill a contract, you’re no longer bound.
What is “A saying used until someone commits a crime against the speaker” Alex.
Religion isn’t about actually helping people. It’s used to control the masses with shame, guilt and the threat of eternal damnation. It’s used to abuse and fleece the weak and the poor.
There are a lot of different religions and beliefs in the world, right? Christianity and similar religions are not the only ones that exist, and many religions originated from ancient human primitive tribes.
Yes and we don’t practice many of those anymore because we know we don’t have to sacrifice people to make sure the sun rises. These primitive ceremonies and practices go away with education and science.
What’s left are grifters, pedos and people abusing those that are desperate and superstitious.
In your mind there are only monotheistic religions practiced in modern times, and the only other religions practiced in the world involved human sacrifice and those practices are no longer present in modern times?
If you need a fictional character to tell you to act like a decent human being then you’re not a good person.
What happens when you need a real person to tell you to act like a “decent human being” like every human in existence today? Are we all by nature “evil” because we require third parties to dictate what “good” is?
Nobody needs third parties to dictate what good is, it’s embedded in our genes.
This is incorrect. You likely have learned little on your own, especially true regarding behavior.
I’m not arguing against that, but there definitely is a moral compass embedded in our genes. We’ve evolved to work and live in a society. Otherwise we would be extinct. You may be taught things that “feel” wrong.
You appear to have never raised children. Being empathetic and kind to children is key so they can learn what empathy and kindness is; without the demonstration (and for many children, the reinforcement) children’s instinct are to resort to violence to get their way. Infants start out in the world copying the perspective of their parents, which is It is so critical to be expressively empathetic with infants so they can learn the appropriate mapping of experiences with feelings.
Children don’t just pick up these values from their parents, but from everyone around them; and in a social group where everyone balances their values against everyone else, norms and traditions form, and now there is an informal religion; and where norms and traditions transcend generations of those practicing, social structures are inevitably built to reinforce the norms into future generations, and now there is a formalized religion.
Any social structure can be corrupted by power. To say religion is inherently amoral because it is corrupt is put on intellectual blindfolds to how social values and norms are shared
We may be speaking of different things. Let me ask you something: do you think the warm feeling you get when you help someone or share a moment of achievement with another person is taught by society?
There definitely is no evidence to support an inherent “moral compass” in humans or any other animal because there is no evidence to support genetic memory which would be required to pass information without teaching it.
Genes are a type of memory. Instincts aren’t taught.
Define instincts and provide an example of them being inherent.
