You're viewing a single thread.
Christian communism. Based.
When you look at the material conditions in which Christianity took hold, it actually is pretty revolutionary. It's a religion based on the rejection of wealth formed in the periphery of a decaying imperialist empire. I'm not religious, but those revolutionary ideas are based as fuck
Im convinced of the exact opposite. I think that Christianity was a Roman psy-op that was designed to pacify a rebellious occupied Judea. Things that the new testament explicitly instructs worshippers to do include:
Don't seek material wealth or power, those who do so are evil.
Remain meek and nonviolent, don't seek liberation, and after you die you'll get everything you would have wanted on earth and more.
Pool your resources and take care of yourselves and each other, but still pay your taxes.
When Roman soldiers attack you, don't fight back.
That's a pretty interesting theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar's_Messiah
If you'd like to read more
Which is why those ideals were coopted by a religion and taken over by the Roman empire to manage and add authoritarian control by making it a God who said all this with their emperor being the only one able to appoint a pope who could clarify the messages in favor of how they wanted to rule.
Wondering if the Essenes invented Jesus.
The overwhelming consensus among credentialed historians is that Jesus was a real person who did in fact live during and in the when and where described in the Bible.
For some reason this consensus makes a lot of atheists angry. As an atheist myself, I'm not sure why. The fact that he's almost certainly a real historical person doesn't hurt my feelings at all and has no bearing whatsoever on the ways in which I arrive at my atheism.
I’ve seen no compelling evidence of one historical figure called Jesus, nor a star. I’m willing to look at anything new you present.
Imo, the veracity of an actual betting isn’t the point. It’s the essence of the teaching, as with Lao Tzi.
Most evidence for historical figures from that long ago is from written accounts. It's unsurprising that a person like Jesus wouldn't have physical proof of his existence.
What I find ludicrous about this supposed consensus, is that the singular exalted evidence cited is a very small passage, acquired third-hand, which differs from the conventional story, from a source that isn't necessarily proven reliable, who doesn't state his own sources, and which was written 80 years after Jesus' presumed death, and was actually cataloging a period about 30 years after his death, and only mentions him in passing.
Shit, there's Elvis sightings with better evidence.
Trot yourself off to r/askhistorians and read the sidebar link on the subject.
You are mistaken and deeply misinformed with regard to the subject.
No need to repeat yourself. Christianity is communist and if you're not communist you're not Christian.