I’ve actually wondered if there is even one Evangelical Christian who is also a Marxist in the US. Those views are pretty incompatible but maybe there’s someone out there who’s trying to mash them both together like two dry play doh colors.
Theres one where Stalin halted a proposal from Molotov from demolishing St. Petersburg Cathedral like the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, and another from among the Bashkirs that tell of his willingness to win victory at any cost that during a meeting with a sufi master he was told the Soviet union would prevail should Stalin convert to Islam, and that Stalin said with no hesitation “There is no God but God, and Muhammad is His messenger.". I’ve also heard stories that he would encourage people to pray if they thought it would help win the Great Patriotic war, and stories of how he was still quietly religious and would go to confession once a month.
Hell I’ve even heard a story about frontline soldiers being caught mid prayer by a commissar, and when asked what they were doing, that they were - jokingly - praying to Stalin and totally not to God. They were told to hurry up with the prayers and get back to work.
I do actually know a self described “Christian Fundamentalist” who is a leftist. The dude is some flavor of Baptist (can’t remember which denomination specifically) and is really rad. He explained it to me once by saying that fundamentalism means following the strictest and most literal word of something. Applied to Jesus and the Bible, that means helping the poor, feeding the hungry, and not trying to hoard wealth.
I’m curious, does your friend think that anyone who does not accept Jesus as their savior will spend an eternity in a state of eternal torment? To me that’s kind of the dividing line between the true “fundamentalists” and everyone else.
Before I deconverted, I tried to embrace Karl Barth Thought since he was basically universalist without explicitly saying so, and I liked a lot of what he had to say. But that part I was too far gone.
(btw Barth is also cool because he incorporated dialectics into his theology!
Edit: a more religiously inclined Marxist should write a book titled “Between Two Karls” about an imaginary conversation between Marx and Barth.
As a random aside, coming from my religious background I tend to cite the end of the narnia novels as a healthier view on the whole be saved or go to hell rhetoric. I personally kind of hate most of those books now but the final book does make it clear that people who do good works, regardless of faith, end up in heaven. Coming from a Christian I feel like it’s a good way to segue into talking about the injustice of a good a just divine figure damning people for being born into a different faith (or atheist) setting.
I guess what I’m saying is that the repent or be damned rhetoric can be wiggled around, but it comes down to how philosophical a Christian is at heart, or if they are just dead set in the rule as it seems to stand in their specific orthodoxy
I think Narnia is pretty cool but god i hate the “Susan didnt get to come back to Narnia because she was too much of an icky girl” thing (note that idr the full details of this and might be getting it slightly wrong)
I dont like Lewis, but he himself said that Susan is kind of the Author insert. (Egg CS Lewis discussion tba) and that her exile from Narnia is temporary.
Also, I’d point out that hopeful universalism is a far older position than fundamentalism, going back to Clement I, who was personally made a priest by Peter. Slightly later Justin Martyr makes a case for the salvation of the virtuous pagans such as Socrates, using a Middle Platonist argument. Prots don’t know this because they’ve never considered reading another book.
On a related note, “eternal hell unless you accept Jesus as Savior” doesn’t mean what evangelicals think it does. Because John makes clear Jesus is literally the Divine Motive force of all creation before and after he was made flesh.
He proceeded from the father before creation as the divine idea of creation itself, reflected back upon creation by god. Those who study eastern religions will note some parallels here with Brahma/Buddha nature/Tao.
So you kind of have to try really quite hard to not be saved. Some people do of course.
I’m writing all this from the perspective of Catholic theology of course, not expecting anyone to accept it as true.
Yeah, the whole “Hand yourself over to us or you’ll face eternal torment beyond anything you can imagine” thing always kind of seemed like dodgy salesmanship to me. A little too on the nose. A little too convenient for the one making the pitch.
I need the occasional reminder that there’re people out there who aren’t just the usual 700 club type and that there’s often significantly more depth to theology. One of the pitfalls of avoiding human contact whenever possible out of fear of the more reactionary elements of the populace.
Personally, I struggle to see how one can continue to deal with the contradictions between Christianity and Marxism without ultimately either abandoning one or essentially being agnostic and admitting that much of their ingrained religious background is unimportant (besides the parts that are basically teaching self improvement and care for your community/world). Thats basically where I ended up
I grew up in an evangelical family and I can say that while Christianity can mesh with Marxism, it’s pretty impossible for evangelicalism to do the same. There’s too much built in shit with the more realized concept of active good and evil divine forces being the driver to what’s wrong in the world, and essentially only god can come and fix what’s truly wrong (ala rapture, god establishing his kingdom on earth post apocalypse). This is in direct conflict with Marxist ideals, which are very humanist, essentially telling us that humans can establish a more just and equitable system ourselves.
My dad is an absolute end of the world nutter and while I can get him to believe in the realities of global warming and injustices under capitalism, his end solution is still divine in nature. It’s frustrating because he can see all of the same issues but evangelicalism doesn’t leave any wiggle room for humans to fix them
I’d go poking around patsoc circles. Can’t be hard to find someone who’s become something like that either out of sincere belief or out of contrarianism
I’ve actually wondered if there is even one Evangelical Christian who is also a Marxist in the US. Those views are pretty incompatible but maybe there’s someone out there who’s trying to mash them both together like two dry play doh colors.
Stalin did nothing wrong because he accepted Christ the Lord into his heart on his death bed.
Did he actually? That’d be pretty funny.
No but he went to seminary school because his mom wanted him to become a priest.
That part I knew. That’s where he learned to be a good Marxist. Haha
I know some apocryphal stuff relating to him and religion, but they seem mostly hearsay tbh
Oh, what’s that about?
Theres one where Stalin halted a proposal from Molotov from demolishing St. Petersburg Cathedral like the Cathedral of Christ the Saviour, and another from among the Bashkirs that tell of his willingness to win victory at any cost that during a meeting with a sufi master he was told the Soviet union would prevail should Stalin convert to Islam, and that Stalin said with no hesitation “There is no God but God, and Muhammad is His messenger.". I’ve also heard stories that he would encourage people to pray if they thought it would help win the Great Patriotic war, and stories of how he was still quietly religious and would go to confession once a month.
Hell I’ve even heard a story about frontline soldiers being caught mid prayer by a commissar, and when asked what they were doing, that they were - jokingly - praying to Stalin and totally not to God. They were told to hurry up with the prayers and get back to work.
That’s based. I hope it’s all true. Haha
I do actually know a self described “Christian Fundamentalist” who is a leftist. The dude is some flavor of Baptist (can’t remember which denomination specifically) and is really rad. He explained it to me once by saying that fundamentalism means following the strictest and most literal word of something. Applied to Jesus and the Bible, that means helping the poor, feeding the hungry, and not trying to hoard wealth.
I’m curious, does your friend think that anyone who does not accept Jesus as their savior will spend an eternity in a state of eternal torment? To me that’s kind of the dividing line between the true “fundamentalists” and everyone else.
Before I deconverted, I tried to embrace Karl Barth Thought since he was basically universalist without explicitly saying so, and I liked a lot of what he had to say. But that part I was too far gone.
(btw Barth is also cool because he incorporated dialectics into his theology!
Edit: a more religiously inclined Marxist should write a book titled “Between Two Karls” about an imaginary conversation between Marx and Barth.
As a random aside, coming from my religious background I tend to cite the end of the narnia novels as a healthier view on the whole be saved or go to hell rhetoric. I personally kind of hate most of those books now but the final book does make it clear that people who do good works, regardless of faith, end up in heaven. Coming from a Christian I feel like it’s a good way to segue into talking about the injustice of a good a just divine figure damning people for being born into a different faith (or atheist) setting.
I guess what I’m saying is that the repent or be damned rhetoric can be wiggled around, but it comes down to how philosophical a Christian is at heart, or if they are just dead set in the rule as it seems to stand in their specific orthodoxy
I think Narnia is pretty cool but god i hate the “Susan didnt get to come back to Narnia because she was too much of an icky girl” thing (note that idr the full details of this and might be getting it slightly wrong)
I dont like Lewis, but he himself said that Susan is kind of the Author insert. (Egg CS Lewis discussion tba) and that her exile from Narnia is temporary.
Also, I’d point out that hopeful universalism is a far older position than fundamentalism, going back to Clement I, who was personally made a priest by Peter. Slightly later Justin Martyr makes a case for the salvation of the virtuous pagans such as Socrates, using a Middle Platonist argument. Prots don’t know this because they’ve never considered reading another book.
On a related note, “eternal hell unless you accept Jesus as Savior” doesn’t mean what evangelicals think it does. Because John makes clear Jesus is literally the Divine Motive force of all creation before and after he was made flesh.
He proceeded from the father before creation as the divine idea of creation itself, reflected back upon creation by god. Those who study eastern religions will note some parallels here with Brahma/Buddha nature/Tao.
So you kind of have to try really quite hard to not be saved. Some people do of course.
I’m writing all this from the perspective of Catholic theology of course, not expecting anyone to accept it as true.
You thought you were serving Tash! But it was me, Aslan!
Yeah, the whole “Hand yourself over to us or you’ll face eternal torment beyond anything you can imagine” thing always kind of seemed like dodgy salesmanship to me. A little too on the nose. A little too convenient for the one making the pitch.
I need the occasional reminder that there’re people out there who aren’t just the usual 700 club type and that there’s often significantly more depth to theology. One of the pitfalls of avoiding human contact whenever possible out of fear of the more reactionary elements of the populace.
Closest I can think of is Jim Jones (and even then he was like at least 85% grift)
Bart Erhman is probably the closest I’ve come across, but I don’t think he entirely considers himself a Christian anymore
He considers himself agnostic, IIRC. Definitely not a Christian, though.
Personally, I struggle to see how one can continue to deal with the contradictions between Christianity and Marxism without ultimately either abandoning one or essentially being agnostic and admitting that much of their ingrained religious background is unimportant (besides the parts that are basically teaching self improvement and care for your community/world). Thats basically where I ended up
The way I do it is by materialising the ideology.
Kingdom of heaven is among you. Jesus is the divine Logos of reality. Go and sin no more etc.
He’s a Marxist?
I grew up in an evangelical family and I can say that while Christianity can mesh with Marxism, it’s pretty impossible for evangelicalism to do the same. There’s too much built in shit with the more realized concept of active good and evil divine forces being the driver to what’s wrong in the world, and essentially only god can come and fix what’s truly wrong (ala rapture, god establishing his kingdom on earth post apocalypse). This is in direct conflict with Marxist ideals, which are very humanist, essentially telling us that humans can establish a more just and equitable system ourselves.
My dad is an absolute end of the world nutter and while I can get him to believe in the realities of global warming and injustices under capitalism, his end solution is still divine in nature. It’s frustrating because he can see all of the same issues but evangelicalism doesn’t leave any wiggle room for humans to fix them
I’d go poking around patsoc circles. Can’t be hard to find someone who’s become something like that either out of sincere belief or out of contrarianism