Material Conditions

[Shahaab]

Some people claim that the so-called prophets and messengers were revolutionists. They say that Moses, Jesus, Muhammad etc. were like Marx and Lenin of their time.

Moreover, they say that all the prophets came to establish a just social order based on equality and fraternity like socialism/communism. Was it possible in the old days of slavery, feudalism, monarchy etc.?

Don't you think it's against historical mindedness or historical materialism. Marxists claim that socialism can't be established unless the necessary material conditions, productive forces and/or productive relations have emerged and developed in the society.

How can we say that those prophets fought and strived for socialism/communism? Can we blame Aristotle, Jesus, Muhammad etc. for not condemning and/or abolishing slavery? Was it possible for them to establish a socialist society at that time?

[NSov]

I know very little about the Islamic fate so I will go at this from the Christian part of the example.

I am Irish, and during mass a prayer would be said for "The conversion of the Soviet Union" untill about the late 80s.

One of the main enimies of Communism in my openion is Religion. I am not sure where, but somewhere within the Bible slavery is condoned. The deposed monarchies of Europe and of course Russia ruled because the church told people "Gods devine plan" requires you to be poor and do nothing about it. God put the king on the throne and you in the gutter. Even George Bush thinks that God has given America a devine task!!!

For somebody like Jesus Christ (takeing it that he was a preacher of prophet and that he did exist) to attempt to abolish slavery at that time would be like Fidel Castro condoning it. Religion had a strong grip on people, as it gave quick and easy answers. "Ra travels across the sky fighting Set, pray to Ra that he my rise again to continue the fight (sun and moon allternating in the sky) of "When you die, you will go to Valhala to prepare for the end of the world!!!"


Also, I don't belive that Christ was a revoutionary. I belive he was power hungry and wanted to run Isreal. He appartently was related to the deposed Royal Family.


I hope this hasn't been too confusing and that at least some...tiny....piece...made some bit of sense!

[Reds]

Jesus was a peasent carpenter, one of the first avdocates of liberation theology, and preched aginst the romans and the religious athority of the rabbies sounds fairly revolutionary for the time.

[Clarksist]

Jesus was a peasent carpenter, one of the first avdocates of liberation theology, and preched aginst the romans and the religious athority of the rabbies sounds fairly revolutionary for the time.


Jesus didn't exist.

If he did, it would be by sheer coincidence, because there is no proof that he existed. His inventor's "liberation theology" was to follow strict rules regarding your relationship to God, and that if you didn't this "all loving God" would purge you to hell for ETERNITY.

How "revolutionary".

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2005, 02:26 PM

Jesus was a peasent carpenter, one of the first avdocates of liberation theology, and preched aginst the romans and the religious athority of the rabbies sounds fairly revolutionary for the time.


Jesus didn't exist.

If he did, it would be by sheer coincidence, because there is no proof that he existed. His inventor's "liberation theology" was to follow strict rules regarding your relationship to God, and that if you didn't this "all loving God" would purge you to hell for ETERNITY.

How "revolutionary".
im still troubled over this jesus doesnt exist statment, ive asked a history teacher and they said that a person named jesus did exist, and the roman's recorded his death. so im going to go on a quest to find this info. :)

[Clarksist]

im still troubled over this jesus doesnt exist statment, ive asked a history teacher and they said that a person named jesus did exist, and the roman's recorded his death.


Ask these same history "teachers" about communism.

They have a hidden agenda.

[JC1]

im still troubled over this jesus doesnt exist statment, ive asked a history teacher and they said that a person named jesus did exist, and the roman's recorded his death. so im going to go on a quest to find this info.

There is absolutly no evidence of his existence. You teacher is either misinformed or lying out of his teeth.

[More Fire for the People]

From my notes on Marxism,

There are two characteristics of religion: the overwhelmingly progress nature of new thought and the regression of progress by the establishment of an orthocratic church-state. During brief moments of the resurgence of the progressive character of religion, the orthocracy is opposed in favor of a communal church and societal progress as in the case of Liberation Epistemology, The Levelers, and utopian socialist.

The opposed orthocracy then uses its own personal parasites of the church or religion to establish its so-called “order”. That is, the army of cardinals, clergymen, Caliph, and the Pope mobilize against the spiritual masses and the smalltime preacher.

The goal of the enlightened religious, or spiritual Marxist, or whatever the followers of faith and socialism call themselves is to split the orthocracy from the masses with such a force that the church and the church-state are split and the church-state collapses. The only time this is possible is during a socialist revolution towards the future as the masses are already energized and mobilized against the state.

In short, religion if seperated from the church-state is more progress than regressive and thus a part of the revolution. Because I do not know most prohpets very well I will use an example of Jesus Christ for now: when a religion is established the church-state does not exist but is created a time after the religion is, typically a century or more after the prophetic message. During this time a religion is solely progressive -- thus in the historical context Christianity has been progressive.
This may apply to other religions as well.

[Clarksist]

In short, religion if seperated from the church-state is more progress than regressive and thus a part of the revolution. Because I do not know most prohpets very well I will use an example of Jesus Christ for now: when a religion is established the church-state does not exist but is created a time after the religion is, typically a century or more after the prophetic message. During this time a religion is solely progressive -- thus in the historical context Christianity has been progressive.


You believe that for the most part Christianity has been progressive?

Christianity is the forebearer of modern sexism, racism, and homophobia. Almost every instance of out-and-out imperialism has been justified through Christianity, in the past thousand years. I would say that on average, Christianity has been far worse for us that good, and that's putting it very lightly.

Religion is never progressive, unless it puts up morals of progression. Christianity progressed nothing. Christianity doesn't even shun slavery, much less endorse Leftism.

[More Fire for the People]

You believe that for the most part Christianity has been progressive?
No, I said for a time being Christianity was progressive, I say until about 90 AD or so and to this day several progressive characters remain.

What I am saying is religion has the potential to be progressive.

And about the slavery issue, in the first century no one was advocating freedom for slaves but the New Testament features a very important concept and two generally neglected ones.
1. The teaching of universal love.

The neglected ones,
2. It is nearly-impossible (if not impossible) for the rich to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.
3. Several versus state that a worker deserves just wages and that he deserves all the value of his wages if we are to apply the LTV to Christian principles on production.