Cranius wrote:You should really watch this film:

The Gospel According to St. Matthew

It's pretty great.

This probably jives with what I've studied about early Christians and the 15th-16th century Anabaptists' attempts to emulate them. Their biblical legalism often eventuated communism. See Hutterites, Bruderhof Communities.

Marx certainly felt this way. He wrote a great deal about the influential early Anabaptist theologian, Thomas Muntzer. A short excerpt on Muntzer:

Thomas Müntzer, born in 1489 in the little town of Stolberg in the remote Harz Mountains in Central Germany, belonged to the select number of German historical figures that the DDR regarded as the ideological ancestors of itself, “the first workers and peasant state on German soil”. That he was held in such high esteem in the DDR was certainly not because of the theological merits of Müntzer, a contemporary, disciple and later an enemy of Martin Luther, but because of the role he played in the most famous uprising of the German peasantry against their feudal lords in the late medieval age. During a few years in the 1520s, Müntzer became the spiritual and political leader of a rebellion that was oppressed as fast as it had risen, and as all the others before and after, ended in bloody revenge by the ruling classes whose most prominent victim, the priest himself became.

Müntzer’s elevation to the Socialist Olympus is mainly the work of Friederich Engels, Marx’s collaborator, who in his book “Der Deutsche Bauernkrieg” (18..) delivered a re-interpretation of the peasant uprising of 1525, in the understanding of historical-materialist historiography classifying it as one of the expressions of the eternal class struggle that moved on society. The humble protestant priest Müntzer thus became in Engels’ view a precursor of the Socialist movement, a proto- Communist rebel who a few centuries before the first socialist revolutions, that in Engels' view were just around the corner, had already attempted to establish a economically and politically egalitarian society. Marxist historians, and thus the party ideologists of the DDR, adopted Engels' interpretation, emphasising the political and minimising the religious aspects of Müntzer's life and work.

tocharian wrote:Marx certainly felt this way. He wrote a great deal about the influential early Anabaptist theologian, Thomas Muntzer. A short excerpt on Muntzer.

Oops. That was supposed to be Engels. I'd forgotten that he and not Marx had written The Peasant War in Germany. Maybe I should try harder to read the excerpt I'm about to post.

*NERD MORTIFICATION*

Rick Reuben wrote:Are you saying that Jesus was a communist?

I'd have to dig deeper to see if there are examples in the Bible of Jesus explicitly preaching communism. There's no question, though, that his disciples believed they ought to "hold all things in common".

New Testament, Acts 2 wrote:And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.

And all that believed were together, and had all things common.

Acts 4 wrote:All the believers were one in heart and mind. No one claimed that any of his possessions was his own, but they shared everything they had.

With great power the apostles continued to testify to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and much grace was upon them all.

There were no needy persons among them. For from time to time those who owned lands or houses sold them, brought the money from the sales and put it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to anyone as he had need.

Stunning, huh, given the politics of most so-call Christians.

Dear Lord,
Not specific to Obama (quite yet), but i was wondering how many more elitist scumbags will be allowed to claim and exploit their 'personal relationship with christ' as some sort Get Out of Jail Free card, post-indictment/scandal/etc. before you call them on it?

Rick Reuben wrote:Are you saying that Jesus was a communist?

Jesus taught to moderate ownership of worldly goods. He did not say to divest oneself of all private property.

In Mark 10:19-25, Jesus replies to a guy who has approached him with the question of how to get into Heaven:

Mark wrote:19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother. 20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth. 21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.

22 And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions.

23 And Jesus looked round about, and saith unto his disciples, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God! 24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God! 25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

He told the rich guy to divest himself of all his posessions, give the money to the poor and go out into the world and preach and work for his keep. Sounds a lot like a commie to me.

Besides, Communism doesn't prohibit people from owning any personal possessions, it restricts people from owning land and private businesses.

So, we have no problem saying that everyone who listens to ICP is a corpulent mouth-breather with webbed toes, but if someone suggests a general dislike of a religion...

I've said many times that I think organized religion is stupid and manipulative and we'd all be better off without it.

The only person who's ever given me shit about it is ol' RR/CB there. But then he'll verbally attack you for agreeing less than 100% with anything he says.

Whether he existed or not isn't this talk of Christ's penchant for Communism taking the whole thing way out of its historical context?

Jesus didn't preach the abolishment of private property, he preached that it was an illusion that should be discarded for the benefit of a man's fellows and his peace of mind.

It is one of the few times that idea was put succinctly pre-Marx and pre-English Socialism, which is well known to every left-leaner who has read the Bible, and a strong part of the standard interview patter of UK Socialist Christians like Tony Benn and Terry Eagleton. It is an idea worth reminiding people of.

And don't get me started on giving to Caesar what is Caesar's. Jesus just loved income taxation.

Rick Reuben wrote:You are a nut. I have never given you shit for your opinion on organized religion. I've told you that you're a fool for being a bigot who thinks that if he finds someone who believes in God, he's permitted to laugh at them and call them 'stupid' or 'mentally ill'.

It's your assertion that faith is a barometer of intelligence that makes you a jerk off..

...

Dickheads like CP see all the smug elitist atheists mocking believers and he wants to be seen as cool by them, so h joins in.

If you're finished beating on the pile of straw there, I'd like to defend myself against your defamation of my personal character and integrity.

I'm not a bigot. I have nothing against religious people in general and I certainly don't assume that everyone who follows a religion is an idiot. My mom is a devout Catholic, and I certainly wouldn't call her an idiot.

Secondly, you are wrong, Tom, in equating having faith with being religious. Religion does not necessarily preclude faith. A person does not need an organization telling them what to believe, in order to have faith. On the other side of the coin, not all people who claim to be religious and do all the rituals and everything really have true faith in what their religion preaches.

It appears to me that although pretty much all the people in political positions of authority in this country make claims of being devoutly religious (attending services and whatnot), most of these individuals' own actions and political positions do not reflect the ideals of their religion. If our leaders acted like the "good Christians" that they claim to be, then George W. Bush would have chosen to "turn the other cheek" after 9/11 and let bygones be bygones with the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Seriously, do you really believe that George W. Bush even prays for all the little children who were killed in the bombing of Fallujah? I can imagine him maybe praying to almighty God to please save his lying, treasonous ass from going to jail, but that's more about cowardice than true faith.

Anyway, this observation leads me to surmise that the only reason the powerful play along with the whole "Religion" game is that they realize the power that it brings, with the political capital and whole "nice guy" image thing. It's nothing but a sly P.R. move for them. What other purpose would somebody have for participating in an organization promoting a worldview that is diametrically opposed to his own? Why be a hypocrite and give lip service to a lot of ideals that you really don't follow or believe, unless you have something real to gain out of it?

BTW, how many religious people do you know who actually believe 100% of what they were taught in their religious studies? How many of them agree 100% with all the tenets of their religion?

This is why I think religion is wrongheaded and manipulative. It makes hypocrites out of the majority of its followers and creates an exclusive sense of community which is constantly used by the powerful to dehumanize others and mobilize wars. Religion causes more problems in society than it resolves, and I believe this will become even more prevalent as global communication technology brings people from around the world into ever closer contact.

Fuck organized religion. It's one of the last vestiges of our barbaric past that seriously needs to go away as soon as possible.

Earwicker wrote:Whether he existed or not isn't this talk of Christ's penchant for Communism taking the whole thing way out of its historical context?

Yeah, but the point is that Christ's teachings were followed far more closely by the ideal society as envisioned by "godless Communists" than the ideals of the "devout Christians" who have been running our country.