Jesus was the first communist, all his teachings and speeches show it, but the church was created by the merchants that Jesus threw out of the temple. Of course they are now the antagonist who uses Jesus nailed to the cross as a company brand.
Protocommunist. Yeah. That’s why he was into full theocracist, never condemned slavery, wanted women to be subjected, considered non of their own ethnicity to be worthless dogs, spread anti-scientist bullshit and even wanted poor people to give everything they had to the temple, and to wait for the end of the world to come and the paradise was described as a theocracist / monarchist utopia. Also he said again and again how you had to believe in Moses and the “Law”, being Deuteronomy and Leviticus.
Meanwhile, there was Zoroaster, who condemned slavery, being waaaaaaaaaaay more “commmunist” than Jesus, and even the religion is so ancient that Hebrews copied them.
This is what the bible describes, as I said edited and censored by the clergy, much later. None of the current evangeliso was written at the time when such a character lived, all of them date from between 100 and 300 AD.
Although the recently discovered Dead Sea scrolls describe this character quite differently, many of these scrolls were therefore immediately removed to the Vatican cellars.
What continues to spread was what you describe, but it sure does not coincide with the facts spread by the first Christians, Gnostics, they were even eliminated and persecuted by the church, precisely because they denied its authorship, believing that all humans, whether men or women, they are equal because the same divine spirit reigns in all of them, which requires neither spokespersons nor temples. This naturally was declared as heresy by the ecclesiastical hierarchy, when questioning its existence. The same ones that later set themselves up as the absolute leaders of Christianity, using grossly forged documents (Donatio Constantini) that were later even approved by dictators throughout history, the last Mussolini.
That is to say, the church is a monumental fraud from start to finish, a simple instrument of power to keep the people submissive and ignorant, the only proposit.
It isn’t at all what he said. Read the whole Bible, and compare it to other religions. It’s all about theocracists struggling to maintain power while also being reactionary assholes in comparison to even other religions. Beginning by how the father of Jesus will make every race to be SLAVES of the descendants of Abraham/Jacob, to the “most perfect and loving man ever being the son of God” being a racist ididiotic sexist asshole.
Christians like to pretend Old Testament don’t exist. I wonder what their (reminder: omniscient) god have to say about it?
Oh yeah:
“Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. But I warn you—unless your righteousness is better than the righteousness of the teachers of religious law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven!” — MATTHEW 5:17-20
The general ideology of putting an end to social injustices was quite clear, although it is clear that in society at that time it could only pretend to move in the margins of the possible and walk on lead feet. Even so, it has been the victim of a tremendously retrograde society with Abrahamic laws and occupied by the Romans in an oppressed society. It is enough to see the ideology of the ultra-orthodox Jews today, which has changed little since then, to know that a drastic change was impossible and would not even have been understood by the population, who already had problems with the few advances that he proposed, as has been shown.
Sort of like traveling to a Taliban settlement and promoting the communist manifesto.
No. Not even in the primitive communism sense, humans lived in communism all the time before class society, there were also things like palace economy which could be considered primitive communism (mostly in decay into monarchy or oligarchy but still at some level), and various religious communes, all before Jesus.
And sure as hell i hope you are not suggesting he was communist in scientific, marxist sense.
communism is a historical movement and idea which came out of the context of capitalism there where no communist before capitalism there couldn’t have been by definition.
you could argue that jesus was egalitarian that he spoke for the poor that he wanted a better world, but not that he was a communist.
Primitive communism maybe? The kind of public ownership people would have in small groups producing barely enough to meet their needs, as opposed to the global abundance that comes from beefy productive forces being owned in common? Either way, it’s still a downgrade compared to what we have now. Hell, considering the mode of production that was developed by Jesus’ time, I’m pretty sure that makes him a reactionary even by his time’s standards. This is pretending he even existed of course, which he didn’t.
No, there is literaly no proof at all, lt’s go one by one:
Alleged
It’s not even know if he was really jesus brother or thaw was just how he was titled, religious sects love titles like “father, brother, mother etc.”
Assuming it’s really John, which is also doubtful, John is still not Jesus. You could as well argument that because Pilatus was real, therefore Jesus was real?
A house for judaic prayer in judaic town? Definitely proof that certain preacher existed!
Seriously?
Was it signed? How many boats were there in those years?
4, 3 and 2. LMAO called it in 8.
Did you even read that article? It’s utter nonsense, way below the usual level of argument for that problem. NONE of that is any proof and the only one that is even possibly linked is point 9 - and that guy is the best existing proof period - which is not up to standard, just as for example alleged sons of Lodbrok are not definitive proof of Ragnar Lodbrok existence.
EDIT: I fucking hate lemmy formatting, i have no idea how to make that look not like shit.
(and just to be clear, I am not arguing that Jesus was a wizard with magical duplication powers, just a guy that existed 2k years ago and probably got crucified, not an uncommon thing at the time)
Still nothing though. The only thing really confirmed it that christians in second half of I century in Rome believed in his existence, which was half century from his death and half of known world from the place.
Also the article in wiki is incredibly biased, starting from “Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.” which is blatantly false, unless they asked only evengelical USA fanatics, by which this article is cleraly written, and then include super nonsense like “nuclei of truth” in testimonium flavianum, which is commonly agreed to be completely false by, this time for real, all serious scholars which are not fanatical christians. And so on and on and on. They even list their methodogy which is basically theology, not history research. I’m not even mentioning logic like “John existed so the NT says the truth here, so it’s all true” which is such a poor fallacy.
No proof at all, only conjectures, fallacies and lies.
I would not at all be surprised If there was some dude in Rome who preached for poor people and against imperialism, who ended up on a cross and as the basis for a religion, and an important figure in others.
There is a theory that Jesus and Barabbas was one and the same person. I like to think this is true, because not only he would be way more based then, but it also resolves literally all the ahistorical nonsenses and improbablities of the trial.
Yeah, this happened many times, but Jesus never said anything against imperialism, nor being a revolutionary. The character was about obeying rulers, for slaves to not rebel against masters, to women be subject to their husbands, and patiently wait for the end of the world… 2000 years ago.
And yet again, to make my point even clearer, I ain’t saying that Crist was a druid with magical wizard powers, for all I know he was just a guy with a following.
This is just bullshit and catholic tradition… Manhattan is real, does this make Spider-Man real? Hey! A bunch of scrapped iron! This is for sure Dr. Octopus remains!.. Dudee…
Considering how many preachers swarmed I century Judea he was probably made from amalgamation of many of them. I mean even new testament mentions some of them like John the Baptist and there is that very suspicious but pretty logical thing with Barabbas.
It is not known, at least not as described in the Bible many years later, edited by the Curie to fit their dogma. Although if there were some at this time who were leading the resistance against the Roman occupation, I could have been one of them perfectly, ending badly like everyone who wanted to change the depraved system throughout history.
There was no one to fit the Biblical description of Jesus, who you called “protocommunist”, to fit any description of a historical Yeshua that was a revel.
Also, it’s literally called Jesus because some prophecy of a Yeshua that was shoehorned in the narrative, so if it was ever some real man (probably as real as Mythra or Hercules or Moses) it wasn’t even called Jesus.
Victim of Abrahamic laws!? What the fuck are you talking about?! WHAT IS THIS ANTISEMITIC NONSENSE!?
Where the fuck do you think even the name of Jesus comes!? Or the alleged fact of him being the Messiah!? Or the fact that he is non stop saying that he came to fulfill the law of Moses, which people thought at the time to be Deuteronomy and Leviticus, and even said that you had to literally believe what Moses said, which was fucking Genesis having to take it literally.
Jesus was the first communist, all his teachings and speeches show it, but the church was created by the merchants that Jesus threw out of the temple. Of course they are now the antagonist who uses Jesus nailed to the cross as a company brand.
deleted by creator
Is he wrong though? Render unto Caesar, the croutons and the parmesan.
Render unto Caesar…
“This Romans are crazy”
Sure, but I did have some things in this direction that are consistent with communism. Let’s say he was a proto-communist, maybe if he had read Marx…
Protocommunist. Yeah. That’s why he was into full theocracist, never condemned slavery, wanted women to be subjected, considered non of their own ethnicity to be worthless dogs, spread anti-scientist bullshit and even wanted poor people to give everything they had to the temple, and to wait for the end of the world to come and the paradise was described as a theocracist / monarchist utopia. Also he said again and again how you had to believe in Moses and the “Law”, being Deuteronomy and Leviticus.
Meanwhile, there was Zoroaster, who condemned slavery, being waaaaaaaaaaay more “commmunist” than Jesus, and even the religion is so ancient that Hebrews copied them.
This is what the bible describes, as I said edited and censored by the clergy, much later. None of the current evangeliso was written at the time when such a character lived, all of them date from between 100 and 300 AD. Although the recently discovered Dead Sea scrolls describe this character quite differently, many of these scrolls were therefore immediately removed to the Vatican cellars. What continues to spread was what you describe, but it sure does not coincide with the facts spread by the first Christians, Gnostics, they were even eliminated and persecuted by the church, precisely because they denied its authorship, believing that all humans, whether men or women, they are equal because the same divine spirit reigns in all of them, which requires neither spokespersons nor temples. This naturally was declared as heresy by the ecclesiastical hierarchy, when questioning its existence. The same ones that later set themselves up as the absolute leaders of Christianity, using grossly forged documents (Donatio Constantini) that were later even approved by dictators throughout history, the last Mussolini. That is to say, the church is a monumental fraud from start to finish, a simple instrument of power to keep the people submissive and ignorant, the only proposit.
Regarding ancient Christians, they were not much different from Johnstown, if you search for it…
deleted by creator
It isn’t at all what he said. Read the whole Bible, and compare it to other religions. It’s all about theocracists struggling to maintain power while also being reactionary assholes in comparison to even other religions. Beginning by how the father of Jesus will make every race to be SLAVES of the descendants of Abraham/Jacob, to the “most perfect and loving man ever being the son of God” being a racist ididiotic sexist asshole.
Christians like to pretend Old Testament don’t exist. I wonder what their (reminder: omniscient) god have to say about it?
Oh yeah:
“Don’t misunderstand why I have come. I did not come to abolish the law of Moses or the writings of the prophets. No, I came to accomplish their purpose. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not even the smallest detail of God’s law will disappear until its purpose is achieved. So if you ignore the least commandment and teach others to do the same, you will be called the least in the Kingdom of Heaven. But anyone who obeys God’s laws and teaches them will be called great in the Kingdom of Heaven. But I warn you—unless your righteousness is better than the righteousness of the teachers of religious law and the Pharisees, you will never enter the Kingdom of Heaven!” — MATTHEW 5:17-20
The general ideology of putting an end to social injustices was quite clear, although it is clear that in society at that time it could only pretend to move in the margins of the possible and walk on lead feet. Even so, it has been the victim of a tremendously retrograde society with Abrahamic laws and occupied by the Romans in an oppressed society. It is enough to see the ideology of the ultra-orthodox Jews today, which has changed little since then, to know that a drastic change was impossible and would not even have been understood by the population, who already had problems with the few advances that he proposed, as has been shown. Sort of like traveling to a Taliban settlement and promoting the communist manifesto.
No. Not even in the primitive communism sense, humans lived in communism all the time before class society, there were also things like palace economy which could be considered primitive communism (mostly in decay into monarchy or oligarchy but still at some level), and various religious communes, all before Jesus.
And sure as hell i hope you are not suggesting he was communist in scientific, marxist sense.
communism is a historical movement and idea which came out of the context of capitalism there where no communist before capitalism there couldn’t have been by definition.
you could argue that jesus was egalitarian that he spoke for the poor that he wanted a better world, but not that he was a communist.
Primitive communism maybe? The kind of public ownership people would have in small groups producing barely enough to meet their needs, as opposed to the global abundance that comes from beefy productive forces being owned in common? Either way, it’s still a downgrade compared to what we have now. Hell, considering the mode of production that was developed by Jesus’ time, I’m pretty sure that makes him a reactionary even by his time’s standards. This is pretending he even existed of course, which he didn’t.
Communist or not, Jesus had that crucifixion coming. The antichrist, on the other hand, is based.
Jesus didn’t exist
Well we don’t know if he had magical powers or something but he existed
(i didn’t downvote u BTW)
We know FOR SURE that if he didn’t had powers, wtf?
aaand im not arguing that, just saying that this guy existed, magical powers or not
Your argued that “we don’t know if magic man was magic”.
I said that a guy that existed 2000 years ago existed, where did I say that he had wizard powers?
There’s no historical evidence of his existence lol
There is sound archaeological proof for his existence, again I’m not arguing that he was a wizard that discovered a duplication cheat or something, But there’s more than enough evidence that he existed
No, there is literaly no proof at all, lt’s go one by one:
4, 3 and 2. LMAO called it in 8.
EDIT: I fucking hate lemmy formatting, i have no idea how to make that look not like shit.
To be fair that article was just an aggregator of sort, here’s more stuff https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
(and just to be clear, I am not arguing that Jesus was a wizard with magical duplication powers, just a guy that existed 2k years ago and probably got crucified, not an uncommon thing at the time)
Still nothing though. The only thing really confirmed it that christians in second half of I century in Rome believed in his existence, which was half century from his death and half of known world from the place.
Also the article in wiki is incredibly biased, starting from “Virtually all scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed.” which is blatantly false, unless they asked only evengelical USA fanatics, by which this article is cleraly written, and then include super nonsense like “nuclei of truth” in testimonium flavianum, which is commonly agreed to be completely false by, this time for real, all serious scholars which are not fanatical christians. And so on and on and on. They even list their methodogy which is basically theology, not history research. I’m not even mentioning logic like “John existed so the NT says the truth here, so it’s all true” which is such a poor fallacy.
No proof at all, only conjectures, fallacies and lies.
(You can use numbered bullet points. Start a new paragraph with the number and a full stop, e.g. “1.” and delete the hyphen.
I see a lot of “it’s possible” and “it’s believed” but none of that looks like crdible historical evidence, by any scholars
I would not at all be surprised If there was some dude in Rome who preached for poor people and against imperialism, who ended up on a cross and as the basis for a religion, and an important figure in others.
There is a theory that Jesus and Barabbas was one and the same person. I like to think this is true, because not only he would be way more based then, but it also resolves literally all the ahistorical nonsenses and improbablities of the trial.
Thanks, Wikipedia. Apparently, Barabbas was a revolutionary, and not a serial killer like I was told.
deleted by creator
Yeah, this happened many times, but Jesus never said anything against imperialism, nor being a revolutionary. The character was about obeying rulers, for slaves to not rebel against masters, to women be subject to their husbands, and patiently wait for the end of the world… 2000 years ago.
Tacitus wasn’t really fond of Christians, Yet his reference to christ is one of the first in the known history
And yet again, to make my point even clearer, I ain’t saying that Crist was a druid with magical wizard powers, for all I know he was just a guy with a following.
It only talks about the Christians, and where are the evidences from that text?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
It’s only people talking about Christians and forgeries. You’re right on this.
This is just bullshit and catholic tradition… Manhattan is real, does this make Spider-Man real? Hey! A bunch of scrapped iron! This is for sure Dr. Octopus remains!.. Dudee…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_Jesus
Appeals to tradition, non sequitur and even “documents” that even have as “fact” the literal resurrection of thousands… Riiiiiiight.
He existed, just he was you know, a normal human.
We have literally zero evidence of his existence beyond the Bible and literal forgeries. It’s normal to be skeptical about this character, frankly.
Considering how many preachers swarmed I century Judea he was probably made from amalgamation of many of them. I mean even new testament mentions some of them like John the Baptist and there is that very suspicious but pretty logical thing with Barabbas.
It is not known, at least not as described in the Bible many years later, edited by the Curie to fit their dogma. Although if there were some at this time who were leading the resistance against the Roman occupation, I could have been one of them perfectly, ending badly like everyone who wanted to change the depraved system throughout history.
There was no one to fit the Biblical description of Jesus, who you called “protocommunist”, to fit any description of a historical Yeshua that was a revel.
Also, it’s literally called Jesus because some prophecy of a Yeshua that was shoehorned in the narrative, so if it was ever some real man (probably as real as Mythra or Hercules or Moses) it wasn’t even called Jesus.
I think that was a joke
I hope so.
If it was I didn’t get it, I’m autistic 🤷🏿♂️
It wasn’t, comrade. And I’m autist too lol.
Victim of Abrahamic laws!? What the fuck are you talking about?! WHAT IS THIS ANTISEMITIC NONSENSE!?
Where the fuck do you think even the name of Jesus comes!? Or the alleged fact of him being the Messiah!? Or the fact that he is non stop saying that he came to fulfill the law of Moses, which people thought at the time to be Deuteronomy and Leviticus, and even said that you had to literally believe what Moses said, which was fucking Genesis having to take it literally.