Atheist Nexus Logo

Relevant articles:

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/from-jesus-so...

 

http://www.lcurve.org/writings/BiblicalLiberal.htm

 

 

 

Whether it's a well-known concept or not, the hypocrisy of modern Christians is startling. Well, not startling when you realize (to even their admittance) that they do not read their own Bible. But startling to us who have, and have gleaned from its pages some positive things.

 

Don't get me wrong, the Old Testament is worth being burned (and as a hard-core reader, who faints when the page of a book is torn, that's something for me to say). But if we look at Jesus' life specifically, without the hubbub of God, the supernatural, and look at it specifically from an economic and socio-philosophical examination of somebody's life, we see something that most Christians would become angry to even hear about.

 

And that's that Jesus was in fact a libertarian socialist.

 

Yes, Jesus was a hard-core liberal.

 

We can't pin Jesus as being socialist alone, only because he obviously does not support the government as being the means through which the needy are taken care of and shared with; the government is not pushed as the entity through which these deeds are moderated. He believed that this was an issue for the people, and that the only government by which people should be governed is the laws and regulations set down by God. In other words, no earthly government should have that power or responsibility, but your wealth that comes from work and production should be shared, given to charity, of your own accord. He himself said that the wealthy making it to heaven would be like a camel passing through the eye of a needle, that it made no difference how much money you had, and made it clear that your time on earth was a time to SHARE the wealth and good fortune you had with those who did not. "The meek shall inherit the earth"; the poor were glorified in early Christianity, those who worked hard, earned little, and yet were humble and giving of what little they had.

 

Jesus as a man, regardless of whether he existed, represents the humble, warm-hearted, but stern teacher that is reminiscent of Buddha. In fact, many of his teachings that give off this very anarchist view of the world and that warn against the evils of wealth are very similar to the teachings of Buddhism (which was present in the area he lived contemporary to Jesus' estimated lifetime, IF he in fact existed; his life does also read as very similar to the life of Buddha, who also performed miracles like walking on water).

 

I am not against these philosophies. In fact, that's why I do not bad-mouth Jesus when I criticize the Bible as strictly as I do. I do not think Christians are wrong for investing love in a man who thinks that way.

 

My problem?

 

Christians, by and large, do not agree with their own mentor.

 

My problem with Christianity is not just hypocrisy of belief, but hypocrisy in even following what they're meant to believe. I can respect the few Christians who identify as some sort of socialist, who give to charity, who are poor by choice, and who agree most of the Bible is bogus but that they still admire the monologues and dialogues involving Jesus himself; socially liberal Christians who don't get the Bible-thumpers either. Although I will always disagree with them on the matter of God, I will never criticize their following of Jesus if they in fact follow what's actually written, any more than I criticize a Buddhist for following the original non-theist teachings of Buddha.

 

I don't think I've ever met a reasonable Atheist that would bad-mouth the actions of Jesus personally in the Bible, even when we tear through the Old Testament, Revelations, and every other ridiculous part of the book that we recognize is a superstitious interpretation of word-of-mouth stories about possible historical events.

 

This is something both secularists and Christians fail to understand. Atheists are rarely 'anti-Jesus', although yes, we can attempt to dispel his existence as myth (or a real person whose biography was exaggerated and combined with myths from other cultures over many years, even), but that does not mean we can't respect some of the things he tried to teach in the literature.

 

My point?

 

Why are so many Christians today so devoutly conservative, Republican, capitalist, and otherwise in the manner of their philosophies, so hellbent on pushing the agenda of the greedy corporate world, when it's clearly not what Jesus would approve of?

 

Does this have something to do with the same statistics that show, that although around 70-80% of Americans identify as being devoutly religious, less than half of them actually observe all of their religious traditions, requirements, or lifestyle factors? Do we have an epidemic today of what we can call 'social Christians'? Those who identify as religious only because society expects it, because their parents expect it, without ever understanding what it is they're supposed to be identifying with?

 

Perhaps.

 

It's extremely discouraging to know people are so backwards.

Tags: anarchism, anarchy, bible, christ, christianity, christians, conservative, jesus, liberal, libertarian, More…secularism, socialism, socialist

Views: 464

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

No, I don't think I misinterpreted what you said. Nobody follows Leviticus at this time anyway. While it is true that some Muslims are executing homosexuals in Nigeria, they are Muslims, not Jews or Christians, and when they cut off the hands of thieves in Saudi Arabia, again, it's because they are following the Koran, not Leviticus.

Christians CERTAINLY don't follow what they call the "old testament" -- I think Paul attributed to Jesus the instruction that if you weren't born Jewish, you didn't have to follow the Jewish laws. So Christians don't keep kosher, and they don't stone adulterers, both of which are commanded in the Jewish writings. Christians derive almost ALL of their behavior from their own writings.

Even ultra-Orthodox Jews don't follow all the commandments literally any more. They've been arguing over exactly what the Torah (first 5 books of the "bible") means for centuries, and continue to do so. Even they understand that modern times call for modern interpretations.

So, no, I don't see where your argument that we should burn the Jewish writings makes any sense. They are no more influential at this point than Mein Kampf is, and you seem a lot more accepting of a much more horrifying document than the ones you want to burn.

I wouldn't be so sure that such an overwhelming majority of people worldwide look at Mein Kampf and realize it's a crock of shit when Holocaust denial, Zionist conspiracy theories and admiration of Hitler are popular in Arab countries and antisemitism is becoming trendy again in Europe.
Those people are still a minority, even if they exist. Even Holocaust deniers by and large know that Mein Kampf was a crock of shit. Holocaust Denier does not equal Holocaust supporter; it's simply the denial that the Holocaust even happened, even if they disagree with the philosophies that led to its execution in reality.
Reading about how Tea Partiers actually cheered when the idea was brought up at the recent GOP debate that people who aren't insured should be denied even ER care and allowed to die physically makes me nauseaous.  I hope I never understand their point of view.  What a horrible way to think.  I think Rick Perry was a little shocked by the yelling and cheering for that one.

@Grace -

I found an article & video here:

Tea party audience cheers letting the uninsured die

 

Yeah, it's really appalling.

 

Seriously, that is exactly why I vote.  People that think freedom means letting people die, that religion "solves" problems, that violence is the answer, that the death penalty reduces crime, that concealed carry means communities are safer need to be kept out of office.  Preferably I support a candidate that talks about doing the work of the electorate.  Obama has only been moderately successful at being able to bring disparate parties together.  That was what I voted for him to do.  Standing with a chip on your shoulder and using divisive language eventually destroys the underlying fabric that used to join us.  Saying "that is what freedom means" distorts and destroys the meaning of the word.  It makes me angry to hear people abuse the word freedom.  The government is responsible for maintaining safety and security in this country.  For pity's sake, this isn't soylent green.  I guess the truth really is stranger than fiction...

The only problem with voting is when you get outvoted by an ignorant, bigoted majority. "Majority rules" is not always (or even often?) a good thing. That's why we have our Constitutional Bill of Rights, but the loonies seem determined to destroy it. I am really disappointed with the American Electorate who seem to be leading us down the road to bread and circuses without the bread (I stole that from someone else, but don't remember who).

I am old enough to remember an optimistic America which really WAS concerned with equality and justice for all, and it appalls me how far from that concept we have descended.

I agree Natalie that the majority is not always and more than likely is not even usually right.  The herd mentality takes over.  Especially today when we are bombarded by information from all corners.  How do you sort through it and make sense of it?  It is difficult.  I need to be more active and get out and talk about the ills of - not conservatism, not the political right - but the philosophies that divide people into us and them.  Divisive vitriol does not help any conversation.  Disagreeing simply to disagree is a grade school tactic that apparently some political individuals have mistaken for moral high ground.  I cannot control what others do and think, but I have every opportunity to talk to people and try to share my experience and hopefully they will see the proverbial light.

you mean isolationist?
and they have a auto-worship the white xtian guy w/suit and tie

the character of jesus was/is a slavelike pile of crap

we're not slaves as much as some have become through the 80s and 90's
never accept that crap ideology of being a conslavative

they wanna save it all for the afterlife?
LOL
they wanna save it all for the afterlife?
LOL

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service