Jesus was a Marxist

[thegreekdog]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

To be fair, I'm not sure there's evidence suggesting that Jesus believed in entities living in clouds.

[BigBallinStalin]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

Yeah, he bought into some other nonsense.

[Dualta]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

Yeah, he bought into some other nonsense.

Indeed he did. As I alluded to in an earlier post, Marxism (even the planned economy-style) is as nonsensical as free-market economics. Any attempt at instigating either would be an experiment beyond reason, which would most likely result in massive human suffering, as recent history has soundly proven. Both, at their logical conclusions argue for economic anarchy. Good luck making that work for the benefit of humanity.

[2dimes]

The early church was a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their needs.

Oh right. That's definitely what Marx and Lenin were going for.

I did not say that. There is reasons I omitted the items you had placed in your description.

[Dualta]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

To be fair, I'm not sure there's evidence suggesting that Jesus believed in entities living in clouds.

If he is quoted correctly (which is hardly likely anyway) he constantly referred to scripture in his teaching. Was he not also reported to be a practicing Jew for most of his life? That's all the evidence anyone should need that Jesus, if he even existed, was a religionist.

[2dimes]

Were the Saducees not also "practicing Jews"? Even though there was no such thing as a Jew at the time.

[Dualta]

Were the Saducees not also "practicing Jews"? Even though there was no such thing as a Jew at the time.

I don't know what this means, or how any of it disproves my assertion that Jesus believed in the Judean god. Are you trying to argue that Jesus did not believe in god?

[chang50]

Were the Saducees not also "practicing Jews"? Even though there was no such thing as a Jew at the time.

I don't know what this means, or how any of it disproves my assertion that Jesus believed in the Judean god. Are you trying to argue that Jesus did not believe in god?

Me neither,clarification please 2dimes.

[2dimes]

Depends on what Judean means I suppose. Neither of you know what Sadducees were, how about Pharisees?

[Dualta]

Depends on what Judean means I suppose. Neither of you know what Sadducees were, how about Pharisees?

I didn't say that I didn't know what Sadducees were. I said that I don't understand your point, or how it disproves my assertion that Jesus believed in the Judean god. I was hoping you would elaborate. By the Judean god I mean the god of the Judeo/Christian scriptures.

[2dimes]

Elaborate? Like writing his beliefs are very different from the most prominent "religionists" groups of his time?

Which of the three did not believe in an after life?

[Dualta]

Elaborate? Like writing his beliefs are very different from the most prominent "religionists" groups of his time?

Which of the three did not believe in an after life?

I'll take this as an, "I don't know what on earth I'm talking about". The surest way of realising that someone is out of their depth is when they ramble off on tangents. Pretty much a standard religionist tactic when trying to argue for the existence of god.

[nietzsche]

Ok. First of all Jesus could've not been a Marxist, in any case Marx was a Jesuist.

Now, his morality, the one he shared, was one that did gave the most value to the femenin qualities (yes, I'm stealing from Nietzsche). The mother has to handle family, families are communists, so betiko has a point, the rest is trolling, and an attemp of we bouncing ideas on him so he can understand.

betiko's point of view is that of an European. I'm not a man of the world per se, but I've been to Europe and met a few of them. (The old continent is not a myth). Europeans, being surrounded by history in the form of buildings and culture, have some sort of stoic attitude, not exactly pesimist but some sort of "I'm an adult, I've seen all that, doesn't work". Americans in the other hand are like the rich kids, they believe everything they hear, while the money of their parents lasts they will live like they are in a party and all is good, their iphones will get them to jupiter.

Now pay attention to this because everyone seems to know it but then when it's time to debate, everyone seems to forget it: Christianism became a way to control people. It was then used as a tool for a means. What the dude actually said or did, we have no clue how much of it we know.

So what do sponges do? They absorb liquids. It's their nature. People relinquish their responsability towards their life by giving all the power to someone else, someone godly, at least they are told. People will chose a religion, it will happen. Relax. The majority is born into one. You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

While you are ready to throw tantrums at me for calling American kids, let me tell you that Mexicans are no better, we are the poor kids that would like to be like the rich kids but can't. We have the culture because we didn't kill all the natives but we don't trust our ancient knowledge, except when someone from other part of the world tell us it's amazing.

Now, go vote for me on Master Debateers.

[Dualta]

You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

Are you referring to me?

[nietzsche]

You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

Are you referring to me?

No, I'm referring to everyone that fits in this new wave of atheists, including me, sort of, that is in vogue nowadays thanks mainly to Troy parker and seth mcfarlane.

But more importantly, did you vote already?

[BigBallinStalin]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

Yeah, he bought into some other nonsense.

Indeed he did. As I alluded to in an earlier post, Marxism (even the planned economy-style) is as nonsensical as free-market economics. Any attempt at instigating either would be an experiment beyond reason, which would most likely result in massive human suffering, as recent history has soundly proven. Both, at their logical conclusions argue for economic anarchy. Good luck making that work for the benefit of humanity.

You keep saying such things as the underlined, but currently you have yet to explain how you arrived at that conclusion. Would you care to enlighten us?

[chang50]

You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

Are you referring to me?

To Nietzsche..

How can maintaining the default position,a lack of belief in the existence of deities,be construed as thinking you are smart.It's where every single person begins their life.The choice,if there is one,is to believe in a deity,unless you know of a newborn who has magically acquired such a belief in its mother's womb?

[nietzsche]

You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

Are you referring to me?

To Nietzsche..

How can maintaining the default position,a lack of belief in the existence of deities,be construed as thinking you are smart.It's where every single person begins their life.The choice,if there is one,is to believe in a deity,unless you know of a newborn who has magically acquired such a belief in its mother's womb?

Althouhg I get what your point is (sort of), it doesn't strictly follow. I perceive that atheists, as they say they are atheists, are saying also "I'm so smart you know". I'm answering you what I think your question was, the second part I can't connect it to be honest, but I'm willing to answer you in that to if you elaborate.

Also, you will have to unfoe me, you are kind of old for holding grudge over a game chat that wasn't even rude.

[chang50]

You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

Are you referring to me?

To Nietzsche..

How can maintaining the default position,a lack of belief in the existence of deities,be construed as thinking you are smart.It's where every single person begins their life.The choice,if there is one,is to believe in a deity,unless you know of a newborn who has magically acquired such a belief in its mother's womb?

Althouhg I get what your point is (sort of), it doesn't strictly follow. I perceive that atheists, as they say they are atheists, are saying also "I'm so smart you know". I'm answering you what I think your question was, the second part I can't connect it to be honest, but I'm willing to answer you in that to if you elaborate.

Also, you will have to unfoe me, you are kind of old for holding grudge over a game chat that wasn't even rude.

In what sense is disbelief in the existence of anything 'smart'?Or are deities a seperate category from all other things that there is insufficient evidence for to the disbeliever?
I'll put it another way..if atheism was positively forwarding another explaination for what deities claim to explain,that would be 'smart.'But it doesn't have any explainations,its nothing more than disbelief..

[Dualta]

You think you are so smart because you are an atheist? By chosing atheism you are crossing a gap too. You are just chosing the religion that it's the cool one now, science/technology/cynicism.

Are you referring to me?

To Nietzsche..

How can maintaining the default position,a lack of belief in the existence of deities,be construed as thinking you are smart.It's where every single person begins their life.The choice,if there is one,is to believe in a deity,unless you know of a newborn who has magically acquired such a belief in its mother's womb?

Althouhg I get what your point is (sort of), it doesn't strictly follow. I perceive that atheists, as they say they are atheists, are saying also "I'm so smart you know". I'm answering you what I think your question was, the second part I can't connect it to be honest, but I'm willing to answer you in that to if you elaborate.

Also, you will have to unfoe me, you are kind of old for holding grudge over a game chat that wasn't even rude.

In what sense is disbelief in the existence of anything 'smart'?Or are deities a seperate category from all other things that there is insufficient evidence for to the disbeliever?
I'll put it another way..if atheism was positively forwarding another explaination for what deities claim to explain,that would be 'smart.'But it doesn't have any explainations,its nothing more than disbelief..

Disbelief in the existence of something that someone has claimed exists, but has not proven exists, is the rational position. Atheism, in terms of the Judeo-Christian god is demonstrably rational with J. S. Mill's argument The Problem of Evil. God cannot both be all good and all powerful at the same time, while evil exists. According to Christians, god created absolutely everything, so on the basis of that assertion we can conclude that god also created evil, but that's where Christians disagree. They say god didn't create evil, that man does that through free will. But it doesn't tally, does it, because god created everything, did it not? So we can safely and soundly conclude that the Christian god does not exist, at least as they understand god to be. Now, to say that there is no creator being of any shape or form, can also be considered irrational, because we just don't know. We can believe there is none, but belief and knowledge are two different things. Therefore, agnosticism is arguably the most rational position to take on the creator being argument. In a nutshell, we can prove that the Christian god does not exist, but we can't prove that god, in the wider sense of a creator being, doesn't exist. Even Stephen Hawking is on record as saying that, through reasoned scientific endeavor, one day, humans will be able to look inside the mind of god.

[warmonger1981]

Jesus was resurrected and visited India and Cashmere were locals threw him a party. He showed them the wounds from his crucifixion and they named him St.Issa. Revise the Koran Circle 7.

God was originally in the dark because from the dark came light. But when God created light God also created a shadow in which we live. God is both light and dark.

Marx's dialectic process originated with Fitches and Hegel. Hegelian socialism is geared to establish monopolies of all kinds under state control. Engels was the smarter of the two. Marx was a follower to Engels.

[thegreekdog]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

To be fair, I'm not sure there's evidence suggesting that Jesus believed in entities living in clouds.

If he is quoted correctly (which is hardly likely anyway) he constantly referred to scripture in his teaching. Was he not also reported to be a practicing Jew for most of his life? That's all the evidence anyone should need that Jesus, if he even existed, was a religionist.

Oh, he was a religionist, but I can say with relatively certainty that he didn't believe that entities lived in clouds. I guess it's okay if you want to use the term "cloud-dwelling entities" to denigrate religion because it seems funny or whatever, but seems lazy and inaccurate. You don't seem like the kind of guy/girl who tends towards laziness or inaccuracy so I thought I'd point it out.

[mrswdk]

In my experience, no one outside of Am*rica thinks in terms of 'atheism vs. religion'.

[mrswdk]

Atheism is not merely an absence of belief in a deity, by the way. It is the belief that there is certainly no deity.

[Dualta]

Marx claimed that a society could only be called socialist when certain conditions were in place:

1. No government/state

2. No private property

3. No wage labour (classlessness)

It should also be pointed out that Marx believed that nation states and communism were mutually exclusive. He went as far to say that any nation state that tried to establish communism within its borders would become a warped entity. I don't think Jesus had a position on any of these things. He was also a fantasist, like other believers in imaginary, cloud-dwelling entities. Marx was a rationalist. He didn't buy into that nonsense.

To be fair, I'm not sure there's evidence suggesting that Jesus believed in entities living in clouds.

If he is quoted correctly (which is hardly likely anyway) he constantly referred to scripture in his teaching. Was he not also reported to be a practicing Jew for most of his life? That's all the evidence anyone should need that Jesus, if he even existed, was a religionist.

Oh, he was a religionist, but I can say with relatively certainty that he didn't believe that entities lived in clouds. I guess it's okay if you want to use the term "cloud-dwelling entities" to denigrate religion because it seems funny or whatever, but seems lazy and inaccurate. You don't seem like the kind of guy/girl who tends towards laziness or inaccuracy so I thought I'd point it out.

You knew all along exactly what I was saying. And I don't denigrate religion because it is funny to do so. I denigrate religion, and the religious, because religion is untrue and immoral and deserves denigration at every single opportunity. Were I in a position to do so, I would outlaw its teaching to children.