Firsty, I don’t think you are arguing in good faith, but I’ll engange nonetheless.
‘‘Not only the part about Creation and the Universal Flood and its Geocentric, Flat Earth inside a celestial metal/glass’’ - This quote implies Biblical Literalism, which is found primarily in reactionary Christian communities, not in leftist ones. I acknowledge the Bible as a historically innacurate source, but that does not take away from its value as a story. The Old Testament (Genesis in particular) contains many myths, but the fact that they are myths does not mean that 1) we cannot learn from them and 2) that they are worthless. Of course there wasn’t a universal flood and of course the Earth is neither flat nor in the center of the Universe, those are relics from ancient Mesopotamian and Semitic religions. But just as we do with fables, we can extrapolate moral lessons from them, and discern which ones are worth extrapolating (the thing with Lot and Isaac and all of that fuckery).
‘‘Abrahamism is the true religion are false’’ - As with all beliefs, they are a matter of opinion. I believe my Semitic Abrahamic religion to be true, but I might be wrong. In the end, I beleve that all religions and beliefs are different glasses through which we see God.
‘‘the New Testament being completely dependant of the Old one’’ - That is what happens when religions come from other religions. Christianity comes from Judaism, particulary Second Temple Judaism, so it is perfectly normal (and even expected) that Christian scripture and theology is dependen on the Old Testament.
‘‘Paul’s letters came before anyt Gospel’’ - The Gospels were a compilation of historical tradition, jus as with any religious text.
‘‘we have little of none historical evidence for Jesus’’ - Most historians agree that 1) Jesus of Nazareth was a real guy that lived in Palestine in the 1st century and 2) that he was crucified by the romans.
‘‘we DON’T KNOW any real thing that happened to him or even said’’ - As I said before, we do know a couple of things about him, and we also have the Q Source, compiled around the year 50 b.C. probably by a direct disciple of Jesus, that do tell us some thigs he probaly said.
‘‘being Paul’s authority in the formation of the Christian ideology superior to the Gospels’’ - Indeed Paul’s theology can be seen in the Gospel, and also Peter’s (in the Gospel of Mark) and John’s (in the Gospel and Letters of John), and that is not a bad thing, that is how religions work.
‘‘but also Jesus was a cultist nutjob asshole that commanded women to be subject to their husbands, slaves to be obedient, to never retaliate against oppressors, giving all the richnesses to the “temple”’’ - Firstly, this is not true. You are oversimplificating a very complex issue of late 1st and 2nd century additions to the Bible. The Gospels never say that women are subservient to men and that slaves should be obedient, those appear in the Epistels to Timothy and Titus, and most scholars agree that they were not written by Paul, but that they were later additions written after his death, therefore in my opinion they have little to no theological value.
‘‘but also not to wash your hands’’ - That was said in a particular context, which should not be removed. It was a response to the Pharisees’ hipocrisy, not a command to be an unygienic pig.
‘‘and promising the end of the world like the good old escatohological zealot he was…’’ - And the world is still here, that is why we use nuance with the Bible. Paul said not to marry and be celibate because the end was near, but since it is obvious that it isn’t, then we should take it with a grain of salt. The lesson to learn here is that we should always be good and try our best, because as it is said in the Gospels, the end could come anytime, and if it doesn’t, then at least we loved our neighbour, fed the hungry, clothed the nakes, etc.
‘‘like Charlemagne’s, where systemic persecution of pagans and non believers was done since then and even until… What?’’ - With Charlemagne, first, it was how things worked in the Middle Ages for everyone, which DOES NOT EXCUSE SUCH ACTIONS, but humanity has always justified violence with religion. The Christians did it, the Muslims did it, the Vikings did it… Again, IT IS NO EXCUSE, but it is how things worked. It was an evil thing to do, we acknowledge that, just as it was evil for the Spanish Empire to genocide Native Americans in the name of God. But also that is no excuse to shit on all Christians, especially those who do not harm anyone.
‘‘In Spain we basically had the inquisition until the 80’s and still the catholic church has a perpetual orgasm of privileges.’’ - I know that, I am a Spaniard. In my church we have fascist imagery on the door. My town and those near it are full of ultracatholic reactionaries. Again, they hide behind the name of God to uphold an oppresive system, the same thing the Catholic Church has done since it gained political power, and is doing still to this day. That is why there are groups of leftist catholics that fight for a better church, such as Cristianos de base de Madrid, which is the one I’m most familiar with. I believe that it won’t be possible to do so unless we strip the church’s political power, but that is a personal opinion.
‘‘Then, tell me. Why should I not be committed to be against this?’’ - Because people’s individual beliefs are their own personal thing, and nobody’s business but theirs, and that should be respected. If you push for militant atheism you will alienate all the Christian working class and push them to the arms of the reactionaries, just as Lenin said. Keep religion and state separate, and let people believe what they wish. If their belief harms others, educate them, and if not, the live and let live. And as Jesus said, love your neighbour as yourself.
‘‘How can any reasonable person be able to cope left though with Abrahamism’’ - That is a personal journey that all Christian leftists go through, and it’s a tough one, believe me, to decostruct all the reactionary tradition within the church and theology, and make peace with your politics and your religion. But I believe that the most Christian ideology is socialism, and the most socialist religion is Christianity.
‘‘where the most “socialist” part was about BEING POOR LIKE THE LIBERAL PARODY OF VUVUZELA NO IPHONE!?’’ - I could quote you all the Bible verses that are clearly socialist, but this is long enough already. I just hope that this wall of text has at least warmed your heart towards Christians. Peace be with you and God bless.
Also I believe I’ve read somewhere in this thread that you are a fellow Spaniard, so allow me to link you Lenin’s thought on religion, which I have been unable to find in English, only in Spanish: https://www.marxists.org/espanol/lenin/obras/1900s/1909reli.htm
No puedo. Simplemente no puedo.
Primero de todo:el judaísmo viene de religiones paganas semitas, demostradisimo, hasta el punto que plagiaron el Enuma Elish, el personaje Zyusudra, y otros elementos mosopotámicos, y aún a sabiendas de ello, seguís sin ver el problema de que algo copiado y plagiado de otros mitos para ser considerados después los hebreos los übermensch de Canaan (recordemos que los hebreos eran cananeos) no queda invalidado, sobretodo cuando sus héroes no existen.
Después de que no queráis ser conscientes que vuestra excusa del “metafórico” invalida entonces también cualquier reclamo sobre divinidad como real, porque claro, si el Génesis es metafórico, por qué no lo es el hecho de Cristo siendo… Bueno, Cristo?
La religión NO ES PERSONAL, afecta a los alrededores y precisamente Lenin abarcó el tema de cómo confiar en los religiosos fue un error tremendo en la Segunda Internacional… Y NO. Jesús mismo fue quien mencionó a la mujer a seguir “sujetas a sus maridos” y otras “maravillas” como que “no es lo que entra en la boca si no lo que sale de ella lo que te enferma”, por poner otros ejemplos. Estoy harto de que uséis miles de excusas para escudaros, pero que pobre de nosotros, los que tenemos que SOBREVIVIR de la sociedad en la que no sólo participáis si no que además promocionáis, y luego se os quede la “cara de pikachu” cuando elementos reaccionarios siguen en pie.
“No es en buena fe”? No pienso actuar de “buena fe” hacia apologistas y propagandistas que actúan de este modo con tal de PRECISAMENTE ALIENAR A LA CLASE OBRERA A FAVOR DEL CLERO Y SU IDEOLOGIA Y DE PRECISAMENTE ALIENAR A VÍCTIMAS DE LAS RELIGIONES PORQUE PRECISAMENTE LES LAMÉIS LAS BOTAS A TIRANOS IMAGINARIOS EN VEZ DE REFUGIAR A EXMUSULMANES, EXCRISTIANOS, EXJUDAISTAS, EXHINDÚES y un largo etcétera sinfin, en el que sólo terminan encontrando refugio dentro del alt right precisamente por VUESTRA culpa, por vuestra falta de honestidad intelectual.
Lo que dijo Lenin sobre los socialdemócratas se puede perfectamente aplicar a la izquierda religiosa, y sabes por qué?
Sigues usando los mismos símbolos, la misma biblia, la misma creencia, la misma mitología, la misma retórica apologista y las mismas falacias propagandística que esos “no, yo no soy como esos” cristianos franquistas, fascistas y en general reaccionarios casados con el clero y el capital.
Y siempre estarás enlazado con ellos a menos que despiertes de toda esa propaganda idealista anti materialista que sólo sirve que para darles coba al mismo clero!
Paz!?
Qué paz voy a tener si para vosotros soy un puto perro de mierda que tiene que ir al infierno y vale menos que una puta hostia consagrada o un vino que “literalmente” se transfigura en “sangre de cristo”? Y ENCIMA PRETENDES IR DE RACIONAL Y DISTINTO AL RESTO CUANDO ERES QUIENES LES DEFIENDES!?
PAZ!?
PAZ CUANDO NO PUEDO DORMIR POR LAS NOCHES Y MIS SUPUESTOS CAMARADAS SERÍAN LOS PRIMEROS EN TRAICIONARME POR NO CREER EN LA MISMA PATRAÑA QUE ES EL COMBUSTIBLE DEL FASCISMO!? YO YA NO PUEDO CONFIAR! YA NO PUEDO VOLVER A SER ENGAÑADO! PARA MÍ YA HAN PASADO Y SE HAN QUEDADO EN MI MISMA CAMA! YA HABÉIS PASADO, Y ME IMPORTA UNA MIERDA QUEDAR COMO EL EDGY ATHEIST! YA! NO! PUEDO! MÁS! CON! ESTA! MIERDA!!!
Siento mucho que la iglesia y la religión te hayan hecho sufrir así, de veras. Te podría decir que ellos no eran de Dios, que no todos somos así, te podría decir mil cosas pero no creo que te vayan a servir de nada. Sólo que si necesitas hablarlo, me puedes mandar un mensaje directo o lo que coño haya aquí, que con estas moderneces no me apaño.
Y pido disculpas por la agresividad de mi comentario, y por haber tratado un asunto tan espinoso de forma tan soberbia. Me han llamado hipócrita muchas veces por ser rojo (y otras cosas) además de cristiano, y al final se pierden las formas. Así que por favor, discúlpame.
Sobre lo demás, podríamos hablar de panteísmo y mitología comparada, pero ya es tarde y mañana madrugo.
Puedo entenderte puesto que antes fui Testigo de Jehová, luego místico variado, cristiano libertino, cristiano crítico y finalmente honesto y escéptico.
Firsty, I don’t think you are arguing in good faith, but I’ll engange nonetheless. ‘‘Not only the part about Creation and the Universal Flood and its Geocentric, Flat Earth inside a celestial metal/glass’’ - This quote implies Biblical Literalism, which is found primarily in reactionary Christian communities, not in leftist ones. I acknowledge the Bible as a historically innacurate source, but that does not take away from its value as a story. The Old Testament (Genesis in particular) contains many myths, but the fact that they are myths does not mean that 1) we cannot learn from them and 2) that they are worthless. Of course there wasn’t a universal flood and of course the Earth is neither flat nor in the center of the Universe, those are relics from ancient Mesopotamian and Semitic religions. But just as we do with fables, we can extrapolate moral lessons from them, and discern which ones are worth extrapolating (the thing with Lot and Isaac and all of that fuckery). ‘‘Abrahamism is the true religion are false’’ - As with all beliefs, they are a matter of opinion. I believe my Semitic Abrahamic religion to be true, but I might be wrong. In the end, I beleve that all religions and beliefs are different glasses through which we see God. ‘‘the New Testament being completely dependant of the Old one’’ - That is what happens when religions come from other religions. Christianity comes from Judaism, particulary Second Temple Judaism, so it is perfectly normal (and even expected) that Christian scripture and theology is dependen on the Old Testament. ‘‘Paul’s letters came before anyt Gospel’’ - The Gospels were a compilation of historical tradition, jus as with any religious text. ‘‘we have little of none historical evidence for Jesus’’ - Most historians agree that 1) Jesus of Nazareth was a real guy that lived in Palestine in the 1st century and 2) that he was crucified by the romans. ‘‘we DON’T KNOW any real thing that happened to him or even said’’ - As I said before, we do know a couple of things about him, and we also have the Q Source, compiled around the year 50 b.C. probably by a direct disciple of Jesus, that do tell us some thigs he probaly said. ‘‘being Paul’s authority in the formation of the Christian ideology superior to the Gospels’’ - Indeed Paul’s theology can be seen in the Gospel, and also Peter’s (in the Gospel of Mark) and John’s (in the Gospel and Letters of John), and that is not a bad thing, that is how religions work. ‘‘but also Jesus was a cultist nutjob asshole that commanded women to be subject to their husbands, slaves to be obedient, to never retaliate against oppressors, giving all the richnesses to the “temple”’’ - Firstly, this is not true. You are oversimplificating a very complex issue of late 1st and 2nd century additions to the Bible. The Gospels never say that women are subservient to men and that slaves should be obedient, those appear in the Epistels to Timothy and Titus, and most scholars agree that they were not written by Paul, but that they were later additions written after his death, therefore in my opinion they have little to no theological value. ‘‘but also not to wash your hands’’ - That was said in a particular context, which should not be removed. It was a response to the Pharisees’ hipocrisy, not a command to be an unygienic pig. ‘‘and promising the end of the world like the good old escatohological zealot he was…’’ - And the world is still here, that is why we use nuance with the Bible. Paul said not to marry and be celibate because the end was near, but since it is obvious that it isn’t, then we should take it with a grain of salt. The lesson to learn here is that we should always be good and try our best, because as it is said in the Gospels, the end could come anytime, and if it doesn’t, then at least we loved our neighbour, fed the hungry, clothed the nakes, etc. ‘‘like Charlemagne’s, where systemic persecution of pagans and non believers was done since then and even until… What?’’ - With Charlemagne, first, it was how things worked in the Middle Ages for everyone, which DOES NOT EXCUSE SUCH ACTIONS, but humanity has always justified violence with religion. The Christians did it, the Muslims did it, the Vikings did it… Again, IT IS NO EXCUSE, but it is how things worked. It was an evil thing to do, we acknowledge that, just as it was evil for the Spanish Empire to genocide Native Americans in the name of God. But also that is no excuse to shit on all Christians, especially those who do not harm anyone. ‘‘In Spain we basically had the inquisition until the 80’s and still the catholic church has a perpetual orgasm of privileges.’’ - I know that, I am a Spaniard. In my church we have fascist imagery on the door. My town and those near it are full of ultracatholic reactionaries. Again, they hide behind the name of God to uphold an oppresive system, the same thing the Catholic Church has done since it gained political power, and is doing still to this day. That is why there are groups of leftist catholics that fight for a better church, such as Cristianos de base de Madrid, which is the one I’m most familiar with. I believe that it won’t be possible to do so unless we strip the church’s political power, but that is a personal opinion. ‘‘Then, tell me. Why should I not be committed to be against this?’’ - Because people’s individual beliefs are their own personal thing, and nobody’s business but theirs, and that should be respected. If you push for militant atheism you will alienate all the Christian working class and push them to the arms of the reactionaries, just as Lenin said. Keep religion and state separate, and let people believe what they wish. If their belief harms others, educate them, and if not, the live and let live. And as Jesus said, love your neighbour as yourself. ‘‘How can any reasonable person be able to cope left though with Abrahamism’’ - That is a personal journey that all Christian leftists go through, and it’s a tough one, believe me, to decostruct all the reactionary tradition within the church and theology, and make peace with your politics and your religion. But I believe that the most Christian ideology is socialism, and the most socialist religion is Christianity. ‘‘where the most “socialist” part was about BEING POOR LIKE THE LIBERAL PARODY OF VUVUZELA NO IPHONE!?’’ - I could quote you all the Bible verses that are clearly socialist, but this is long enough already. I just hope that this wall of text has at least warmed your heart towards Christians. Peace be with you and God bless.
Also I believe I’ve read somewhere in this thread that you are a fellow Spaniard, so allow me to link you Lenin’s thought on religion, which I have been unable to find in English, only in Spanish: https://www.marxists.org/espanol/lenin/obras/1900s/1909reli.htm
Paz camarada, no pasarán.
No puedo. Simplemente no puedo. Primero de todo:el judaísmo viene de religiones paganas semitas, demostradisimo, hasta el punto que plagiaron el Enuma Elish, el personaje Zyusudra, y otros elementos mosopotámicos, y aún a sabiendas de ello, seguís sin ver el problema de que algo copiado y plagiado de otros mitos para ser considerados después los hebreos los übermensch de Canaan (recordemos que los hebreos eran cananeos) no queda invalidado, sobretodo cuando sus héroes no existen.
Después de que no queráis ser conscientes que vuestra excusa del “metafórico” invalida entonces también cualquier reclamo sobre divinidad como real, porque claro, si el Génesis es metafórico, por qué no lo es el hecho de Cristo siendo… Bueno, Cristo?
La religión NO ES PERSONAL, afecta a los alrededores y precisamente Lenin abarcó el tema de cómo confiar en los religiosos fue un error tremendo en la Segunda Internacional… Y NO. Jesús mismo fue quien mencionó a la mujer a seguir “sujetas a sus maridos” y otras “maravillas” como que “no es lo que entra en la boca si no lo que sale de ella lo que te enferma”, por poner otros ejemplos. Estoy harto de que uséis miles de excusas para escudaros, pero que pobre de nosotros, los que tenemos que SOBREVIVIR de la sociedad en la que no sólo participáis si no que además promocionáis, y luego se os quede la “cara de pikachu” cuando elementos reaccionarios siguen en pie.
“No es en buena fe”? No pienso actuar de “buena fe” hacia apologistas y propagandistas que actúan de este modo con tal de PRECISAMENTE ALIENAR A LA CLASE OBRERA A FAVOR DEL CLERO Y SU IDEOLOGIA Y DE PRECISAMENTE ALIENAR A VÍCTIMAS DE LAS RELIGIONES PORQUE PRECISAMENTE LES LAMÉIS LAS BOTAS A TIRANOS IMAGINARIOS EN VEZ DE REFUGIAR A EXMUSULMANES, EXCRISTIANOS, EXJUDAISTAS, EXHINDÚES y un largo etcétera sinfin, en el que sólo terminan encontrando refugio dentro del alt right precisamente por VUESTRA culpa, por vuestra falta de honestidad intelectual.
Lo que dijo Lenin sobre los socialdemócratas se puede perfectamente aplicar a la izquierda religiosa, y sabes por qué? Sigues usando los mismos símbolos, la misma biblia, la misma creencia, la misma mitología, la misma retórica apologista y las mismas falacias propagandística que esos “no, yo no soy como esos” cristianos franquistas, fascistas y en general reaccionarios casados con el clero y el capital.
Y siempre estarás enlazado con ellos a menos que despiertes de toda esa propaganda idealista anti materialista que sólo sirve que para darles coba al mismo clero! Paz!? Qué paz voy a tener si para vosotros soy un puto perro de mierda que tiene que ir al infierno y vale menos que una puta hostia consagrada o un vino que “literalmente” se transfigura en “sangre de cristo”? Y ENCIMA PRETENDES IR DE RACIONAL Y DISTINTO AL RESTO CUANDO ERES QUIENES LES DEFIENDES!? PAZ!? PAZ CUANDO NO PUEDO DORMIR POR LAS NOCHES Y MIS SUPUESTOS CAMARADAS SERÍAN LOS PRIMEROS EN TRAICIONARME POR NO CREER EN LA MISMA PATRAÑA QUE ES EL COMBUSTIBLE DEL FASCISMO!? YO YA NO PUEDO CONFIAR! YA NO PUEDO VOLVER A SER ENGAÑADO! PARA MÍ YA HAN PASADO Y SE HAN QUEDADO EN MI MISMA CAMA! YA HABÉIS PASADO, Y ME IMPORTA UNA MIERDA QUEDAR COMO EL EDGY ATHEIST! YA! NO! PUEDO! MÁS! CON! ESTA! MIERDA!!!
Siento mucho que la iglesia y la religión te hayan hecho sufrir así, de veras. Te podría decir que ellos no eran de Dios, que no todos somos así, te podría decir mil cosas pero no creo que te vayan a servir de nada. Sólo que si necesitas hablarlo, me puedes mandar un mensaje directo o lo que coño haya aquí, que con estas moderneces no me apaño.
Y pido disculpas por la agresividad de mi comentario, y por haber tratado un asunto tan espinoso de forma tan soberbia. Me han llamado hipócrita muchas veces por ser rojo (y otras cosas) además de cristiano, y al final se pierden las formas. Así que por favor, discúlpame.
Sobre lo demás, podríamos hablar de panteísmo y mitología comparada, pero ya es tarde y mañana madrugo.
Un abrazo camarada.
Puedo entenderte puesto que antes fui Testigo de Jehová, luego místico variado, cristiano libertino, cristiano crítico y finalmente honesto y escéptico.
Also, forgive my poor formatting, if you will. I am still getting used to this site.