Stonetoss, the author of this template, is a nazi.
Always disappointing to see stonetoss comic edits.
Well, I didn’t know that. Never heard of him before.
A Reddit link was detected in your comment. Here are links to the same location on alternative frontends that protect your privacy.
He is Hans Kristian Graebener
You can just choose not to use stonetoss comics.
I like to use the “sheep and goats” bit to fuck with chuds. “Charlie Kirk is in hell because he didn’t welcome the stranger.” “Whatever you do unto the least of these you do unto me. You want to deport the Son of God.”
Jesus also said to follow the law of Moses so he was cool with the slavery, rape, etc.
Idk why people keep acting like he was some kind of socialist. It’s just cope
Something I emphasized once to a religious person I know, which seemed to be taken well in their case at least, was that whether you believe in a specific religion or not, it’s undeniably going to get influenced by the society it exists within. The reason I bring this up is, maybe Jesus was a real person and was terrible, maybe he was a real person and was akin to a socialist but various interpretations of Christianity over time have warped what he said and did to make him look like something else, maybe he wasn’t a real person and is more of an amalgamation of figures and influences from the era. Whatever way it goes, people still have to choose what they’re going to support as okay or not okay right now and they can and should have a say in what their religion is like if they’re going to be a part of it. Otherwise, they are deferring a senseless amount of authority to the supernatural, akin to being something like a slave to it. Even religious teachings will often say that stuff happening on Earth is tainted by human “flaws” in some way - that’s going to include teachings themselves! When people cede power to an institution run by human beings and then believe that the institution is actually being magically run by a god somehow, they are just ceding power to other human beings with some denial involved. The institution should serve the needs of the people, in other words, not become a tool of justifying their oppression.
I think the institution shouldn’t exist at all if it justifies oppression. No amount of coping is going to change what the bible actually says.
It’s not about coping. The bible is a book written by human beings with words that can be changed and have been changed and passed through languages and institutions of power. Nobody actually goes by all of what it says literally, even if some of them claim to act on various parts of it based on their particular interpretation. Even those who believe some kind of divine inspiration is involved in the bible would have to admit, on inspection, that it can’t all divinely be inspired to full correctness when it’s such a mess of portrayals and narratives.
I agree with your first sentence generally. I just don’t think religion has to be oppressive inherently, but it is instead largely a reflection of the dominant power structure. And I’m doubtful that it’s going to go away any time soon, even if oppressive power structures are dismantled, but that it will have to adapt in order to continue as I believe it has often done in the past.
Then we…don’t need it at all? If you can just change whatever words to fit whatever you need at any time then there’s no point to it whatsoever. It doesn’t give us anything inherently that secularism doesn’t.
-
I’m not saying it can be changed to whatever at any time, but rather that it is capable of adapting to a certain degree and often has to in order to continue. Certain core beliefs are going to stay largely the same, else a given religion stops being the religion that it is and becomes some other religion.
-
Religion does have things to offer that secularism doesn’t; at least insofar as we’re talking about modern nihilistic secularism under capitalism (secularism under a socialist state may take on a different character, I don’t have the benefit of living under one to know very clearly on that). It’s been a while so he could be sus in views, I don’t know, but years back in my lib days, I remember watching a talk by Alain de Botton where he goes over the ceremonial and community aspects of religion and basically argues that these serve a purpose that purely secular life lacks. I’m not expecting you to go find that and watch it, but it stands out to me as a point of contention on the issue and I think it’s a valid one. And based on my personal experience with religion people and with certain kinds of people (people who are more drawn to tradition, ceremony, etc.), I’m inclined to believe that whether it’s technically religion or no, some people are going to find ways to do things in a manner similar to the solemnity and reverence of religion.
-
We have to contend with the fact that there are billions of people who believe in a religion. According to a quick search, it would appear if the polling is to be trusted, the majority in fact believe in a religion. So I’m looking at this not just from the standpoint of what I’d personally prefer, but also what the current reality of it is. Although not everybody goes super dedicated into their religion, religious belief can be an extremely fervent and staunch thing, with some people willing to martyr themselves over their faith. It’s far from arbitrary. It’s just that it’s not more powerful than material conditions and the barrel of a gun. That doesn’t mean religious people are going to happily and easily give up religion and replace it with nothing.
ceremonial and community aspects of religion and basically argues that these serve a purpose that purely secular life lacks
I disagree. You even say:
I’m inclined to believe that whether it’s technically religion or no, some people are going to find ways to do things in a manner similar to the solemnity and reverence of religion.
Yeah, which reinforces the idea that it’s not necessary. You see regular ass people worshiping sports players, but at least they’re actually real and not telling people to commit genocide and owning slaves.
That doesn’t mean religious people are going to happily and easily give up religion and replace it with nothing.
That goes without saying? For some reason people seem to think this is the position of atheists who see the horrors of religions and it’s just like…not?
No one is ever going to convince me that this stuff is good for humanity as a former indoctrinated christian of almost 20 years, and it seems like there’s a weird gentle handling and defense of this horrific shit, I’ll never understand it.
I honestly don’t know how to respond to this. I tried to start writing some stuff, but it feels like we’re talking about two completely different things.
-
Why is it ok for communists to engage in capitalism in a capitalist world but its not ok for Jesus to discuss slavery in a world of slavery?
Communists are allowed to transition to a better world slowly but Christians have to have completely abolished slavery in 33BCE to be taken seriously?
I’m not even a christian but this is just idealist nonsense.
Christians can take the words of their central figure seriously, but I shouldn’t in a internal critique?
It’s not an “internal critique” if you are going to misrepresent what Jesus said. He said he came to complete the law of Moses and that people shouldn’t follow the law blindly. His whole deal “love of god and love other people as yourself” and the rest of the law should be applied after that consideration.
If you want to do an internal critique start with what Jesus said was the most important thing “love god and love your neighbor as yourself.” From there you can say “If the rich loved the poor as they loved themselves they would give the poor everything they need. If the bourgeoisie loved their neighbors as themselves they would gladly give up control of the means of production to their neighbors of the working class. So to follow the teachings of Christ is to be a communist.”
Don’t get me wrong I’m not a christian. I think 80% of the bible is fabrication and exaggeration. I’m not eve convinced that Jesus even existed. But if you take the book at its word the teachings of Jesus aren’t anything bad.
Churches twist the message into hate and division and that sucks but it doesn’t mean the message “love each other” is bad or that it should be ignored. The working classes that are subject to that system are not the problem just like factory workers aren’t responsible for the factory owner’s wealth and power.
The goal of communists is to break the bourgeoisie control by reminding Christians of the primary commandment of Jesus not condemn them for being exploited by the bourgeoisie. Just as we don’t condemn workers for increasing the wealth of the Bourgeoisie we educate them so they know who really makes the wealth so they can unite against the exploiters.
There are lots of good Christians who could be good communists if atheist communists weren’t so dogmatic spiteful and dismissive.
There are lots of good Christians who could be good communists if atheist communists weren’t so dogmatic spiteful and dismissive.
Yup, if they do convert to communists, their stories will be similar to Gaspar García Laviana or other liberation theology christians that joined the guerrilla to topple fascist dictators throughout Latam. This writing helps clear how some made the jump to great communists.
“Somozaism is a sin, and freeing ourselves from oppression is freeing ourselves from sin.”
His poetry, letters, and reflections show that his decision to become a guerrilla fighter was not an act of desperation, but the logical consequence of his faith. As he wrote in Campesino 2 :
“I felt your poverty in my flesh…
I wanted to extinguish your poverty with legalistic justice;
when I couldn’t, I became a guerrilla fighter.”If you want to do an internal critique start with what Jesus said
I guess you didn’t read the part where he said “I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it” and that “not one stroke or letter will be changed”. People always use the “greatest commandments” bullshit to act like he said ignore all the laws, those are done with, when he explicitly said the opposite. People don’t read the book.
Churches twist the message into hate and division
This is just straight up not true. The default position is one of division of believers and nonbelievers. The book preaches hate, and the churches gladly spread the message, because it’s from an “all-knowing, all-good god”. By default everything god does is good, so all the horrific shit is good.
There are lots of good Christians who could be good communists if atheist communists weren’t so dogmatic spiteful and dismissive.
Lol yeah it’s totally my fault that I actually read the book and came to the conclusion that christianity is vile and repulsive. There’s a reason why colonialism and christianity go hand in hand and it has nothing to do with atheism.
As someone who is atheist and once had a Christian friend at the time tell me that I acted more Christian-like than some of the Christians they knew, this feels very relatable. I don’t like to share that story because it feels too much like I’m bragging about myself, but I’ll make an exception here for the rhetorical point; that you don’t have to believe to act in a way that largely syncs up with the spirit of certain religious teachings and some of the people who do believe act less in the spirit of it than some of those who don’t.
We could as well make a similar point about the sort of things we believe in, and talk about, here. Belief in it and sympathy for it is helpful, but it isn’t on its own living the spirit of it (the practice end of things).
My experience with Christians has been very negative. When my disability benefits were wrongfully stopped, after selling all my possessions I ended up so destitute I couldn’t afford food. The local food bank is very time consuming and difficult to access, and often closed. After relying on the food bank for a while I fainted in the street and ended up being diagnosed with multiple nutritional deficiencies. In desperation I turned to Christian organisations. I tried local churches but was very rudely turned away. I tried a huge Christian forum with thousands of members - just asking for help accessing Christian food pantries if there are any - and was insulted and given no help. I was told to “man up and sort your own problems out,” told that I shouldn’t even get disability benefits in the first place because “that’s socialism,” and when I told them I was so desperate for food that I had turned to shoplifting, I was told to repent and confess my crimes or I would deservedly go to hell. They would not help me. I got so desperate that I joined an online suicide pact forum, wanting someone to help me take my life (I had tried before an failed, so wanted to make sure it got done properly.) Several people made pacts with me but they always let me down at the last minute. Starving and totally desperate, I offered for sale on the forum the only thing I had left, my prescribed medications. For that, I was banned, but just before I got banned one of the members told me about mutual aid and suggested I try hexbear, (which is also how I came to find lemmy.)
The response from people here couldn’t be more different than the Christians. The vast majority of people have been empathetic and unjudgmental and multiple people have helped me out with food and other items I need. Sometimes it can take weeks and multiple posts to get a response, but usually someone eventually comes through. I can’t even imagine what I would have done without the help from here. People here have shown more kindness and solidarity than any of the Christians.
I’m sorry you’ve struggled so much with that, but I’m glad you’ve consistently found help on here and on hexbear. ❤️
As shitty as it is, it makes a kind of sense to me why Christianity is in such a dismal state: in order for an institution that influential to be allowed to exist under capitalism and imperialism, it gets warped into another extension of it. Or in the best case, such as the Catholic Church, might do some stuff for charity but gets defanged of any revolutionary potential. Though “best case” feels weird to say in reference to the Catholic Church when also considering its history of abuse. As I understand it, they are being more diligent now with hiring standards and the like to try to stop the problem from continuing, but that doesn’t undo the damage already done.
Anyway, yeah, a Christianity under communism would probably look much more like the stuff about “when I was hungry, you gave me to eat; when I was thirsty, you gave me to drink” kind of spirit of it. I still wouldn’t personally believe in the Christian faith, but it’d have to change from the capitalist attitudes to co-exist with a more AES state vanguard type of situation.
I guess capitalism really does warp everything.
Or in the best case, such as the Catholic Church, might do some stuff for charity but gets defanged of any revolutionary potential.
Check out https://redsails.org/western-marxism-and-christianity/
Edit: put in a newline.
