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.
No, because socialism is when bad thing! /s obviously
Matthew 25:35-40
35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
It’s also worth noting that parable of the sheep and the goats was a judgement of nations.
Wait until the suckers learn that he doesn’t want people to eat animals in the apocryphal writings. But that’s just how Christianity works… Take what fits the bill (Emperor Constantine, Jerome of Stridon, anyone?).
Jesus was an authoritarian. He believed there should be one being with ultimate power and control who everyone else should obey unquestioningly.
He believed that this being was better than every living person. That any person who disobeyed the ruler should be tortured. That we are only alive, only well, only happy, if the ruler permits it.
That any person who disobeyed the ruler should be tortured.
If this is about hell, I don’t think Jesus believed in hell, at least not as we know it. He also did definitely teach about erasing the social hierarchy, at least among humans. So he was a theocrat, sure, but he wasn’t only a theocrat.
Matthew 25:41
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."
It’s part of a parable, but if we disregard parables then “jesus’ teachings” becomes a small pamphlet.
But I’d be keen to hear where jesus advocated for abolishing human hierarchy. Nothing comes to mind immediately outside Paul’s letters.
You are absolutely right. It isn’t complicated. A fundamental principle from the teachings of Jesus is that everyone should share their “wealth” (i.e. food, housing, medical care, etc.) with those in need. No one should ever be hungry, homeless, or sick without treatment. It follows naturally from the idea of loving everyone, without exception.
I’m not going to argue the questions about whether Jesus was divine or even existed. I am simply talking about the philosophy that is presented as his by the Gospels. That is the core of Christianity, but it is ignored by a majority of those who call themselves Christians. The fact that it is difficult and calls for personal sacrifices is not an excuse. He never said that it would be easy.
I accept that Christian principles can be viewed as aspirational goals and not an absolute code of conduct, but that is not what we see in the would-be Christians. They have no interest in working toward those goals.
Aristotle discussed some ideas central capitalism. Why don’t we start a new cult around him and his ideas? We could eventually use the cult to exploit vulnerable individuals, brainwash innocent people, commit human rights violations, incite people into committing hate crimes, start wars and promote chaos and suffering in general.
If anything socialism is Christianism since that’s what Jesus taught, not socialism.
Anyway Pope Leo XIII explained it better in the Rerum novarum (distributism not socialism), maybe an Anarchist (on Earth) because there is no ruler but Him, no government but God’s.
Lol it’s like reading fan fiction
Wha wha WHAAAAAAAAT??!
NOOOOOOOOOO!!!
More than that, giving food and drink to the hungry and thirsty, welcoming strangers, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, and giving comfort to the imprisoned, is literally the same as doing those things for Jesus Christ, himself, from his perspective. And, moreover, those who do those things will earn their place in heaven, and those who fail to do those things will be eternally damned to hell. It’s not subtextual. It’s not ambiguous and up for interpretation. It says very clearly that Jesus separated those who are going to heaven and hell to either side and the distinction between the groups was how they treated “the least” of his brothers and sisters. Matthew 25:31-46.
So, bad news Christian Republicans. Might want to correct yourself now before it’s too late.
They aren’t. In fact, many of the MAGA Republicans have been pushing their pastors to stop being so “woke” and to teach “real” Christian values, i.e. oppressing people.
The sad thing is that these pastors are giving up their values and acquiescing.
And that is why churches must be firebombed and religion abolished.
bUt mY fIrSt aMeNdMeNt!!
This isnt 1785 any more. Cristianity is a violent terrorist ideology.
It’s also just invented stories, and the maga crowd knows that, they are not like in fear of damnation or anything.
Mega hypocrites though of course.
Jesus literally REFUSED to be dragged into ideological politics of his time (John 6:10-15)
He even defied those who tried to put him to test and force a political statement come from him against the current political leader, the Caesar, by trying to have him a forced position on taxes (Mark 12:13-17)
All this makes sense, as he himself said about himself and his followers that they are not part of this world (John 15:19)
He LITERALLY made his teaching revolve around god’s kingdom, not any human ideology (Matthew 6:9, 10)
I mean FUCK, even Satan himself offered him to be the ruler of the whole FUCKING world and he rejected it flat out (John 14:30)
He did care about people, and alleviated the physical suffering of many, but he made clear his and his followers priority should be preaching and teaching God’s word (Mark 1:32-38)
And why wouldn’t he, after all, part of his teachings are that all the world governments and ideologies are to be destroyed. (Revelation 16:14) Every. Single. one.
Yes, including socialism.
So anyone using his teachings to attack whoever and linking him to your ideology, calling him a representative of brand “X” collectivism, should get down from any high horse they think they are, it’s not doing you or them any favor and they clearly don’t know what they are talking about.
Case in point, people talking in here about a hell existing in the bible when there is none. That’s basically all it takes
Yea, but The Church (or, since you’re specifically talking about Gringoland, rather, churchES) are capitalist enterprises - hence you can’t expect them to criticise capitalism (even less, capitalists).
I can and I do. If they go so heavily against the teachings of the person they’re named after, they’re nothing but the worst kinds of hypocrite.
…and you are figuring that out in 2025?
Someone criticising something in 2025 doesn’t mean they just figured it out in 2025.
What part of my post implied that I recently came to this conclusion?
Well, given that the world is pretty much on fire right now, it does feel a bit out of place to start rambling about Christian hypocrisy. So, like, yea, I get your point and I do believe most religious people are hypocrites (nor is that a phenomenon that only affects Christians), but…how about, if we want to follow that line of thinking, pointing the finger at the ‘’‘’‘’‘’‘‘Jewish’’‘’‘’‘’‘’ state and its genocidal ‘’‘leader’‘’, that rabid dog no politician anywhere is willing to put a leash on? We would be talking about hypocrisy at a much, much higher level and it would be, at the veeeery least, as relevant…
No. Socialism is a form of government that relies on forced redistribution, which is not something Jesus ever advocated for or practiced. He DID encourage people to share their wealth and take care of the poor, yes, but he never took anything by force in order to give it to them, and he never told people to do so either.
Socialism is an economic theory second to the form of government. IOW, you can have authoritarian + socialism, authoritarian + capitalist, or whatever combination might exist, like Democratic + socialism, or social policy.
All systems rely on forced redistribution in some form unless it’s anarchy.
Did Jesus ever advocate for trusting the system?
You might as well ask me what Gandalf advocated.
So you have no idea what Jesus advocated for, but you’re confident that he’d agree with you…
He was literally teaching people that other governments and ideologies woukd be absolutely obliterated
No human system would be left
Wait, am I not forced to pay taxes? And isn’t any progressive tax by definition redistribution? United States confirmed as socialist, you heard it here first!
Yes, progressive taxation is a feature of socialist government.
Whoa. Its hard to get it that wrong.
What did I get wrong? Where did Jesus advocate for forced redistribution by government?
Jesus literally said to pay your taxes. What is a tax other that forced redistribution?
Yes but did he say paying your taxes will remove the obligation to take care of your neighbor?
I’m kinda missing the verse where he said “Give Caesar what is Caesar’s, and let him take care of the poor.”
So Caeser can take the money and kill Christians with it instead? I’m not sure you’re making the point you think you’re making.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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 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.
What is “A saying used until someone commits a crime against the speaker” Alex.
Not necessarily. Punishing theft or manslaughter is not oppression. And it makes sense to have systemic safeguards against those
threat of eternal damnation
And that’s what a lot of people get wrong about christianity. Jesus literally said “everyone who lives and believes in me shall never die”
And what happens with those that don’t believe? Those that doubt for even a second? Burn in hell for all eternity!
Believe in us or you are forever doomed.
It’s an ultimatum designed to terrify and control people.
And what happens with those that don’t? Those that doubt for even a second? Burn in hell for all eternity!
Even the apostles doubted many times and nobody thinks they burn in hell right now.
It’s an ultimatum designed to terrify and control people.
If somebody calls himself christian out of fear and terror, then I’m afraid we believe in different gods.
Fair enough, but try to answer the question: what does happen to those that don’t believe in Jesus?
Even the apostles doubted many times and nobody thinks they burn in hell right now.
Nobody thinks or do you mean you think? Cause you have to be joking yourself if you think there are no worshippers that fear burning in hell for their sins.
If somebody calls himself christian out of fear and terror, then l’m afraid we believe in different gods.
How do you know which one is correct? Yours is just an interpretation of another person’s interpretation of events that happened ages ago. The writing in the bible is clear about burning in hell for all eternity and now you are cherry picking what parts you believe in?
How does any of this shit have any kind of credibility with that level of brain gymnastics.
I don’t believe in any gods. There are hundreds of versions of god that you don’t believe in, only difference is I don’t believe in one more.
Even the apostles doubted many times and nobody thinks they burn in hell right now.
Nobody thinks or do you mean you think?
I mean… they are literally called “saint” and guess what it means.
Cause you have to be joking yourself if you think there are no worshippers that fear burning in hell for their sins.
Surely there are. If I met such person, I would gladly talk with them, or recommend some literature on this topic.
How do you know which one is correct? Yours is just an interpretation of another person’s interpretation of events that happened ages ago. The writing in the bible is clear about burning in hell for all eternity and now you are cherry picking what parts you believe in?
It’s not my interpretation, it’s the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church (and probably other “variants” too, I’m just not aware of the differences).
I don’t believe in any gods. There are hundreds of versions of god that you don’t believe in, only difference is I don’t believe in one more.
Okay, that’s your choice
