https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... ent/355899
Christianity started off as the religion of the dispossessed. After a period of class warfare the ruling class (polytheistic) adopted the religion of the lower classes and turned it into the state religion (Constantine). This was the formation of Catholicism. A new counter revolution happened under the banner of Protestantism and this was also eventually adopted by the ruling classes (Northern Europe). The ruling class is and always will be right-wing and any religion they adopt will always be as such interpreted. — ovdtogt
Yes. Jesus was not a Christian, but a Jewish reformer. Because he preached to the "dispossessed", and understood how the Romans would react to his rabble-rousing, he anticipated a period of extreme hardship for his followers, preceding the "end of the age". That may be why he advised a communal lifestyle of mutual support : "They had all things in common". (Acts 2:42, 4:32)
Years later, when it became obvious that Jesus was long gone, and the "end of the age" had not come, the early Christian tactic of circling the wagons, began to shift toward preparing for a long haul. By the time it became the State Religion of the dominant world power, a complete attitude adjustment was needed. The religion of poor subjugated Jews, meeting in humble homes, was converted into a replica of Roman emperor worship with pomp & splendor appropriate for a wealthy imperious gentile culture, and meeting in grandiose pagan temples. Thus Jesus, the crucified downtrodden Jew, was transformed into the risen triumphant Christ, ruling over the whole world from his exalted throne in the clouds.
So, the modern Christian religion has a split personality : a> the poor-in-spirit tend toward communism or socialism, while b> the rich & powerful tend toward individualism and capitalism. Ironically, some of the poor-in-money like to interpret their scriptures as offering them, in exchange for faith offerings, miraculous access to the wealth of the upper class, and un-christ-like displays of extravagance. Consequently, while a "hard reading" of the Bible may sound leftist, a looser reading can seem downright right-wing. Ironically, the current Pope*1 seems to be leaning leftward, making the conservative Curia uncomfortable.
*1 Caesar Augustus was the Pontifex Maximus of Roman emperor worship. And that title was inherited by Catholic Popes.
Phil Forum : Christianity and Socialism
Re: Phil Forum : Christianity and Socialism
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussi ... cialism/p3
Smart... Real smart.. That makes a lot of sense. Jesus must have been a genius for his time to predict the outcome of his preaching. Or at least highly emotionally intelligent — Reverie
Jesus didn't have be too smart to predict the Roman suppression of sedition; just a basic knowledge of Jewish history. He had a series of predecessors, back to the Maccabeans, who were either killed in battle or executed for insurrection against oppression by gentile world powers. That may also explain why Paul decided, if you can't beat'em, join'em.
Smart... Real smart.. That makes a lot of sense. Jesus must have been a genius for his time to predict the outcome of his preaching. Or at least highly emotionally intelligent — Reverie
Jesus didn't have be too smart to predict the Roman suppression of sedition; just a basic knowledge of Jewish history. He had a series of predecessors, back to the Maccabeans, who were either killed in battle or executed for insurrection against oppression by gentile world powers. That may also explain why Paul decided, if you can't beat'em, join'em.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests