This pissed me off so fucking much when people defend Christianity by saying that all of the bad shit is in the Old Testament and that the New Testament is totally fine.

1 Corinthians 6:9

“Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,”

Gay people and gender non-conforming people are not allowed in to heaven

1 Peter 3:1

“Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands;”

It’s still an extremely misogynistic book even in the new testament

Romans 1:26-27 … 32

"For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

Both homophobia and misogyny

I could go on and on, and I probably will in the comments, but it’s pretty fucking clear that all the nasty bigoted shit in the book just doesn’t go away in the New Testament

You cannot separate the bigotry from the Bible. The Bible is very clear that you cannot pick and chose, that you have to accept the full book or none of it, you can’t just take the verses you like and still be Christian. To be a good Christian who follows the entire Bible you must be bigoted

75 points

China and the Soviets got it right. You gotta treat religious institutions as every bit as backward and reactionary as you treat capitalist ones. That doesn’t mean you ban them outright, but you bring them under control of the state and keep them from preaching anything out of line or using their cultural influence against the DOTP.

permalink
report
reply

Italian communists who are able to seize state power will do far more good forcing the College of Cardinals to elect a communist Pope than abolishing the Catholic Church. China already does this with Tibetan Buddhism. And there has been various splits among Tibetan Buddhism due to CPC meddling, which is good. The more they split, the weaker they’ll be as an organized force.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Iosif Grigulevich promoted an idea to set up a red anti-pope in Krakow as a way to undermine authority of Catholic Church and promote left-wing thought among Catholics.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points
*

Agreed but I doubt religious people love the idea of their institutions being subordinate to a political party. Seems antithetical to the whole god thing and equally repulsive to the religious masses people here are claiming we’re alienating

permalink
report
parent
reply
71 points

Truthfully, I feel like too many modern leftists are so (understandably) fed up with Reddit-style new atheists that they start seeing criticism of religion itself as an inherently bad thing, as if Marxism isn’t anti-religion.

I am in favor of a proper materialist approach to the issues with religion, and I’d be the first to voice my concerns about the reactionary vibe that atheism has taken on in recent times.

permalink
report
reply
25 points

It is really an interesting thing how religion — possibly the most idealist thing in the world — interacts with the actual material world in practice. Like a major factor behind why Laestadianism became so popular with Sámi people was because its message of temperance basically, well, resonated with the Sámi: like many colonized peoples, the Sámi were being driven into an epidemic of alcoholism, and the Laestadian movement not only promised to do something about that epidemic but in practice did actually significantly alleviate the epidemic. So the Sámi basically had a materially-based dislike of alcohol, and a materially-based distrust for the Church of Norway, and these materially-based feelings ended up being channeled idealistically through Laestadianism, eventually culminating in the very material act of the Kautokeino uprising.

As Marx himself said in the first chapter of Capital, “They do not know it, but they do it” — this is the core idea to understand when it comes to religion, I think: religion is pure idealism, but ideas are always in some way grounded in the material world.

permalink
report
parent
reply
63 points

your argument is based in idealist moralism, not actual material analysis. your moral condemnations are admirable but entirely useless and a typical example of liberal westoid smugness and edgy circlejerling.

a marxist-leninist approach to revolution is rooted in material conditions and class struggle, not cultural crusades or idealist moralism. while religion has historically served ruling-class interests, it also emerges from the real suffering and alienation of the working class. hostile, edgy anti-theism (“reddit atheism”) that treats religion as mere ignorance or superstition misunderstands this reality and ultimately undermines revolutionary efforts by alienating the masses.

marx’s critique of religion is often misused by superficial atheists. when he called religion “the opium of the people,” he was not simply condemning faith, but identifying it as a response to suffering in a world devoid of meaning and justice. religion, in this sense, is both a symptom of oppression and a coping mechanism for those experiencing it.

from a materialist standpoint, religion persists because it fulfills real social and emotional needs under capitalism. the task of revolutionaries is not to mock or suppress these beliefs, but to transform the conditions that give rise to them.

and if you would try to even once get out of your yankoid ignorance and actually look at the historical precedence of socialist projects, you would learn a lot:

In its early years, the ussr launched aggressive anti-religious campaigns, shuttering churches (and destroying century-old architectural monuments in the process), ridiculing faith, and persecuting religious leaders. these efforts, spearheaded by organizations like the League of the Militant Godless, were driven by ideological zeal rather than mass-line engagement. they confused state atheism with revolutionary strategy and alienated millions of religious workers and peasants whose faith was deeply embedded in their communities and daily lives.

rather than focusing drawing believers into the socialist project through improvements in their material conditions and political education, the early state attempted to impose atheism from above. this approach was idealist, disconnected from the real consciousness of the masses, and politically self-defeating.

they thus unwillingly played into the hands of the reaction, since religious believers, especially in rural areas, came to view the new socialist state as an enemy of tradition, community, and morality. reactionary forces capitalized on this resentment, painting themselves as defenders of the common people.

recognizing this, comrade Stalin eased anti-religious policies during the great patriotic war, in order to build unity, effectively admitting that earlier methods had been divisive and counter-productive.

leftists should understand that atheism, like any belief system, must be approached strategically. the goal is not to impose a worldview, but to unite the working class in the struggle against capitalism. religious people are not the enemy, capitalism is. mockery and cultural arrogance only serve to fracture potential alliances.

instead, we must engage religious workers respectfully, meet their material needs, and build class consciousness through shared struggle. religion will fade not through coercion, but as alienation and exploitation are overcome.

permalink
report
reply
29 points

to add one more thing, ive seen many “progressive” zionists use these same arguments as you in order to justify the oppression of the “batbaric” arab christians and muslims

permalink
report
parent
reply

your argument is based in idealist moralism, not actual material analysis. your moral condemnations are admirable but entirely useless and a typical example of liberal westoid smugness and edgy circlejerling.

EXACTLY. See also the New Atheists like Richard Dawkins deepthroating the war on terror

permalink
report
parent
reply

your argument is based in idealist moralism, not actual material analysis. your moral condemnations are admirable but entirely useless and a typical example of liberal westoid smugness and edgy circlejerling.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

recognizing this, comrade Stalin eased anti-religious policies during the great patriotic war, in order to build unity, effectively admitting that earlier methods had been divisive and counter-productive.

Maybe not the best example since he also recriminalized homosexuality and abortion.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Those things are usually going hand in hand.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

Yeah u got it pre much

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

Everyone needs to get this comment to the top.

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points

Yup, Christianity is at its core bigoted and anti-marxist.

We need to be able to deal with religious people regardless, meet them where they’re at and push left, but it’s still a shame when communists defend religion as if it were some neutral trait.

permalink
report
reply
12 points
*

I think the biggest shame is that the son of god in the Bible is basically a Marxist. If you can’t see how Jesus would’ve been vehemently anti-capitalist, then you are already lost.

It’s easier for a camel to fit through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven? You will find thousands of threads online about how this means something entirely different from what it says.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

you guys just dont get it, this is my comfort belief system - I’m sure we can cut out the bad parts of it, you see I’m a good Christian, you can trust me

it’s a very well known and widely held opinion on hexbear that you can simply reform problems out of archaic and failing systems, just don’t look at the bad actors those guys don’t count

also neither do the millions of people using my religion as a shield for their bigotry, they don’t count either - unless we’re arguing for why we need to be soft on religion, in which case they totally count and you are being very naive to exclude them

also if you bring them up as a reason why these things shouldn’t be finding such support on a website that bills itself as welcoming to the oppressed you are personally attacking me and the immaterial beliefs that I need to help me cope with the material reality we live in, which I find to be very marxist of me

permalink
report
reply
30 points

also I’m sure it’s just Christianity that has this issue, and every other religion is actually A-OK

permalink
report
parent
reply
26 points
*

the millions of people using my religion as a shield for their bigotry

TENS of millions, and even that is being overly generous.

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points
*

we should open a c/conservative while we’re at it, considering there are millions of conservatives around the world that don’t follow the ‘yankoid’ Republican party and have their own personal conservative beliefs. I’m sure there are many who aren’t transphobic - it’s not like there’s a doctrine to being right wing

after all, it would be naive to not reach across the table on our path to communism

or maybe a c/police, not everybody has had the american cop experience - there are good cops out there who don’t support the bad cops, they should be given space too

permalink
report
parent
reply
16 points

c/bourgeoisie

permalink
report
parent
reply