Jesus was a Marxist

[thegreekdog]

'Was Jesus a Marxist?'

No. He predated marxism (and communism and capitalism and a host of other isms) by almost 2,000 years. Marxism posits a natural evolution of economic relationships before communism, none of which existed when Jesus was alive (including feudalism). If we're simplifying this into "Jesus gave money to the poor" and therefore that means "marxism" then, well, I don't know what to tell you because you don't understand marxism.

[betiko]

Well, Romans were as close as you can get from a capitalist state.
Jews were not treated as citizens and were a lower class. Jesus fought injustice how he could; he shared other people s wealth to distribute it to the poorest (bread, fish).
He gave free health care to anyone he could.

Marx and egels being born after is completely irrelevant. If Jesus is the son of god, he doesn t need to wait thousands of years for marx to invent marxism. His dad invented marx ffs, and jesus has tons of super powers. Jesus invented Marxism, Marx just phrased it.

Actually, I think other people shared their wealth with poorer people per Jesus's instructions. I'm not sure Marx, Engel, and company, LLC, had the same view, but if we use your logic, I'm a marxist since I give money to charity and volunteer.

So, you don't understand marxism. I think you understand Jesus, which is weird considering your anti-religious proclivities. You also don't know much about Roman history (or Jewish history). So...

you are a marxist!

On a more serious note, I just opened this thread to make a joke about all these stuff I see on internet about Amercians calling Obama a Marxist. Just look at all these memes ect... I just see them as hard core religious republicans with a little pea in their head. Just thought this thread could help, but looks like I've touched something sensitive and a few of your are taking it a bit seriously...

I think we addressed the Obama is a marxist idiocy in another thread (I think it was called "Obama is a Marxist" but might also be the health insurance thread). And I only addressed the Jesus is a marxist comment because that was also brought up in another thread and because your attempt at a joke was not based in any kind of factual background. Jesus most assuredly was not a capitalist (neither is the Catholic Church, for whatever that's worth).

As for Rome and the Jews, you can do your own reading if you want to avoid silly comments like "Rome was capitalist" and "Jews were a lower class." I'm not here to write a history paper for you.

There are always people who would rather split hairs than just engage with the actual topic at hand.

Which is what?

Maybe you can figure that I ve never seen nor participated in any of the threads you are referring to.
Maybe you also need to have a better read before starting your condescending bullshit tone. I said that Romans were as close as you could get from capitalists. If you are too big of a moron to understand this as me saying "rome was capitalist" or to understand when something is said as pure boufonerie.
Tiberius was the Roman Emperor during Jesus's early life and was very hostile towards jews, so was caligula his successor. There was repression towards them in Judea and the entire Empire during that period. If you are going to be "mr know it all" at least give your arguments, or shut the f*ck up.

[betiko]

There are always people who would rather split hairs than just engage with the actual topic at hand.

The way you say something is more important than what you say... If nobody understand your meaning, or if the way you say something means different things to different people, then this idea of "splitting hairs" is important...

If you want to have a "real" conversation, than quit making general assumptions and ignorant remarks and ASSUMPTIONS that people will think what you wrote was what you meant.

Or you can just figure the general tone in off topics conversations? Do you really need a roadmap to understand that this thread, given its title and its OP is for kidding?

[Anarkistsdream]

There are always people who would rather split hairs than just engage with the actual topic at hand.

The way you say something is more important than what you say... If nobody understand your meaning, or if the way you say something means different things to different people, then this idea of "splitting hairs" is important...

If you want to have a "real" conversation, than quit making general assumptions and ignorant remarks and ASSUMPTIONS that people will think what you wrote was what you meant.

Or you can just figure the general tone in off topics conversations? Do you really need a roadmap to understand that this thread, given its title and its OP is for kidding?

No, no, betiko... You are fine, brother... My point is that it IS important to be specific and concise if you are trying to have a real conversation... Obviously, many people don't know the difference between a joke topic and a real one... I have been known, on occasion, to not know the difference myself- especially when I have been drinking...

[Gillipig]

Jesus was Jewish so he couldn't be a Christian as Christians hates Jews. Unless he hated himself of course......Was Jesus the first antisemite?? If that's the case was Hitler actually the second coming of Jesus Christ? And did Hitler kill himself because he realized he's also a Jew? Things are starting to make sense here.

[thegreekdog]

(1) Serious Thread is Serious

Notwithstanding your new and awesome argument that is new and somehow will be convincing because it uses more strawmen and seems more serious because you used curse words, if you recall on page one I used this definition:

The Free Dictionary defines marxism as follows: the economic and political theory and practice originated by Karl Marx and Freidrich Engels that holds that actions and human institutions are economically determined, that the class struggle is the basic agency of historical change, and that capitalism will ultimately be superseded by communism.

Do you have a definition that fits your characterization that Jesus was a marxist? You didn't provide a definition; I did (that's kind of how it works I think, if we're having a serious discussion). Jesus doesn't fit within that definition for the reasons I've indicated (e.g. Marx and Engels weren't alive yet, there was no capitalism, etc.). We didn't even get to the idea that actions and human institutions are economically determined, which Jesus certainly did not believe, and that there is a class struggle, which Jesus also did not believe (since the poor are the ones getting into heaven). Jesus also didn't believe in "the state" so that kind of takes out the communism part.

So, if you want to have a serious discussion, use your words. Find a definition of marxism that fits into what you think Jesus stood for or change marxism to something else and use that definition to fit into what you think Jesus stood for. Otherwise, you're blowing smoke and/or it's a joke/trap thread.

(2) Trap Thread

You're looking for a certain person or type of person to respond which I suppose will happen later this evening. I think I probably ruined that for you, so I apologize.

[/]

The first requisite for the happiness of the people is the abolition of religion.

If Jesus is a Marxist, then he's also a drug pusher that wants you to suffer!

[BigBallinStalin]

Well, Romans were as close as you can get from a capitalist state.
Jews were not treated as citizens and were a lower class. Jesus fought injustice how he could; he shared other people s wealth to distribute it to the poorest (bread, fish).
He gave free health care to anyone he could.

Marx and egels being born after is completely irrelevant. If Jesus is the son of god, he doesn t need to wait thousands of years for marx to invent marxism. His dad invented marx ffs, and jesus has tons of super powers. Jesus invented Marxism, Marx just phrased it.

Actually, I think other people shared their wealth with poorer people per Jesus's instructions. I'm not sure Marx, Engel, and company, LLC, had the same view, but if we use your logic, I'm a marxist since I give money to charity and volunteer.

So, you don't understand marxism. I think you understand Jesus, which is weird considering your anti-religious proclivities. You also don't know much about Roman history (or Jewish history). So...

you are a marxist!

On a more serious note, I just opened this thread to make a joke about all these stuff I see on internet about Amercians calling Obama a Marxist. Just look at all these memes ect... I just see them as hard core religious republicans with a little pea in their head. Just thought this thread could help, but looks like I've touched something sensitive and a few of your are taking it a bit seriously...

ps: for me marxism is just a current of communism. lke the difference between catholic and christian.

Also enlighten me. What is so far of from the capitalist system during the roman empire era? The "investment" were different, but they did invest to finance wars and get a return on investment through land, slaves and pillage. Banks existed back then, credits, loans and interest as well. What makes the roman empire's economical system so different from the capitalist? They did create value and added alue as well. They made many technological advances ect.

And now what, the Jews of Israel were highly considered by Romans during the Christ's time? yeah tell me about it, I'm curious!

Banking. Capitalization -- that's where you get the "capital" of "capitalism" from. The banking from the 1600s to today differed from banking way back in the day.

The Roman Empire wasn't capitalist, or it was just as 'capitalist' as the Chinese Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Mongol Empire, etc.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/capitalization.asp

The capitalism of recent times does have roots in the Roman Empire--but it also has roots from the Middle East and its various forays into Italy and the rest of Europe.

[Metsfanmax]

(2) Trap Thread

You're looking for a certain person or type of person to respond which I suppose will happen later this evening. I think I probably ruined that for you, so I apologize.

Successful prediction is successful.

Banking. Capitalization -- that's where you get the "capital" of "capitalism" from. The banking from the 1600s to today differed from banking way back in the day.

The Roman Empire wasn't capitalist, or it was just as 'capitalist' as the Chinese Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Mongol Empire, etc.

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/capitalization.asp

[2dimes]

No talking animals losers. Trap thread it is not. Mmmm.

Yahusua was not a communist but his disciples were after he left. All who owned land or possessions sold them and they shared everything as needed.

[thegreekdog]

No talking animals losers. Trap thread it is not. Mmmm.

Yahusua was not a communist but his disciples were after he left. All who owned land or possessions sold them and they shared everything as needed.

Communism - a political theory derived from Karl Marx, advocating class war and leading to a society in which all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs.

Charity - the voluntary giving of help, typically in the form of money, to those in need.

[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.

[notyou2]

So monks are communists?

[2dimes]

I would describe anyone living in a commune as communist. You?

[notyou2]

I would describe anyone living in a commune as communist. You?

I don't anymore, I already told you that.

[2dimes]

I did not hear you. Did you write it somewhere?

[notyou2]

On your wall.

[2dimes]

Which room? I just read 24 pages of wall on my profile and missed it.

[notyou2]

Which room? I just read 24 pages of wall on my profile and missed it.

Might have been john9blue's wall. I get you guys confused.

[2dimes]

Weird I'm pretty sure I'm taller.

[notyou2]

Maybe it was jaya2jay

[AndyDufresne]

I was googling for evidence to support or refute the claim. I came across this website, which seems to refute the claim, since marxism is the work of a godhater (among other things).

http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/

Click image to enlarge.

Investigate!


--Andy

[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.

[thegreekdog]

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.

[2dimes]

Maybe it was jaya2jay

I don't know how tall jay is.