I don’t get it why this guy keeps on posting biblical passages and quotes; proclaiming himself as a “Christian” on his Facebook page, and right after that would declare- “Greed is good”.

I don’t get it why the same guy would keep mentioning well-being, spirituality and inspirational messages and then would declare- that the people who want change, people who want to end corporate greed, people who go to the streets and lobby their causes, fighting for their rights, equality and change, are “shallow and pathetic”.

I am no devout, religious Catholic. I have my faults, my doubts, and my own personal blasphemy. Although I have had exposure on several religions and beliefs, (and I respect them all); I know that there is a divine power that governs us, and universal principles like love, humility, compassion, honesty, perseverance, courage, wisdom, initiative, etc. are what all these religions preach.

But I gauge intentions through actions (or lack of action). Going to mass, reading the Bible, and preaching your faith is one thing. But living life according to the teachings, bringing change, empowering people is another.

Would your god want you to just read verses to the hungry or the oppressed? Would your god want you to just focus on earning your own wealth, buying stocks, tasting expensive food but you don’t involve yourself in actual service to His people?

Christ during His time was a revolutionary Himself, challenging the government of the Roman Empire, taunting the old archaic doctrines of the Pharisees, that’s why He got crucified. He wanted change, He lobbied new laws for change and preached compassion (as opposed to another revolutionary at that time, Barabas, who wanted change as well but through armed struggle).

Jesus Christ was one man against an Empire, against entire old beliefs (stone an adulteress to death as opposed to forgive and repent, etc.) He might not have succeeded during his lifetime, but His death inspired millions and brought about a radical change in spirituality, making Christianity a world-wide system of faith.

Now, can you tell Christ that his struggles were “shallow and pathetic”?

Advertisements

13 responses »

  1. For one thing, Jesus is not revolutionary himself, nor leftist. He obeyed under protest, remember, the time when he himself ask God the father, if he could spare his suffering in the future, because he knows how painful it will be, but he still obeyed. Luke 22:41-42
    “And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and kneeled down, and prayed, Saying, Father, if thou be willing, remove this cup from me: nevertheless not my will, but thine, be done”.

    Another thing, Jesus did not make a new law, he went back to the law that was establish by his father, (which is God) in the old testament and taught it to the people.
    “Do not think that I came to destroy the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to destroy but to fulfill” (Matthew 5:17), because they’re not getting it right and they’re not following the commandments anymore (for one thing Jesus was born a Jew, and he still obey and respect the pharisees and follow the Jewish tradition despite the persecution from the pharisees, meaning, he is not a christian, he is Jewish,The book of the genealogy of Messiah Yeshua (“Jesus Christ”), the son of David, the son of Abraham (Matt. 1:1) Abraham is the first Hebrew and king David is a Jew). Jesus did not taught the people to rise and protest, instead he told them be humble and meek, and follow God’s commandment and gave comfort to the oppressed and need that was mentioned in the beatitudes.

    He even then instructed the people to give what is “due to Cesar”. Matthew 22:21
    “They say unto him, Caesar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s”.
    Why would Jesus said it even though these people (whether it be a government official or priest or pastor) are corrupt? because our giving of taxes or tithes is not dependent on our decision if we want to or not, whether they’re corrupt or not, it is our obligation to do so.
    Christ’s kingdom that was taught in parables (ex. wedding banquet, matthew 22:1-14 and etc.) is a monarchy, not a democracy. The supreme trinity is the king, and the christians are his people, his subjects. People who are called christians should follow Christ’s commandment and His example.

    • C.Seamus says:

      I knew I should have not tackled religion, but anyway, here goes-

      First of all, thanks for the input and the quotation of Biblical passages.

      But I beg to disagree.

      In all forms of debate, it is pointless to use the Bible as a source, unless we are debating on what was “written” per se. (that means, if I am discussing a point that was written as well)

      I was referring by the way to the historical Jesus, yes, Jesus the Jew, Jesus the teacher, the man recognized by many cultures not only Christians today as having existed and lived a life of inspiration and teachings that was different from the norms of the time. Jesus the man who lived, the prophet, the sage, according to history and not through interpretative written works alone.

      The Bible was an interpretation of the inspired men who wrote the events according to their set of beliefs at that time. This was a time where early Christians were persecuted, so they have to remain hidden, remain humble, but then we have martyrs, people courageous enough to profess their faith even when faced with death.

      Now you quoted passages out of context. That is the usual misdoing of many so called “righteous” men who start their own religion and claiming they knew the real message of the Bible by a specific passage they encountered. To rebut my claims, you chose some particular passages. I can as well do the same thing, by quoting passages that would conflict your claims, but I will not resort to that. The Bible should not be taken piece by piece, the real message of the whole book, is how to empower people, overcome sin, live a life of love and inspiration and make the world a better place for all mankind.

      In plain context, (and my point really) was that, during Jesus’ time, his teachings were new, since people were still with the traditional Hebrew beliefs from Abraham’s time. You will notice how the God of the Old Testament seems to be bent on punishing and exerting authority compared to Jesus’ message of forgiveness, compassion and turning the other cheek. This was new to the people then who were practicing Abraham’s religion.

      Jesus was a revolutionary, he was on the streets, preaching, teaching. The government was threatened as well by his charisma and new teachings, if he were the submissive fellow who was just so meek and humble, praying all the time in temples, he would not have been crucified. He was inciting change, he was inspiring people to be better than they are, and the men who were in power would not like that.

      Ok, let’s just say what if I “accept” your points, and concede that Jesus was NOT a revolutionary?
      Are you claiming that-
      1. your god/your faith/your religion does not want people to have better lives?
      2. your god/your faith/your religion teaches that to save the oppressed, we just pray, and persevere?
      3. your god/your faith/your religion would want a monarchy? where people are passive, submissive, subjects? that’s similar to medieval beliefs

      I believe my God would want me to take action when I see a man being stabbed to death. I believe my God would want me to stop people stealing money from the poor. I believe my God would not want me to stay in the church and pray for the corruption, but would want me to do something about it. Our God-given FREEDOM should be practiced with RESPONSIBILITY and ACCOUNTABILITY in the same way our God-given SKILLS, TALENTS and GIFTS are meant to be shared and be used for the His people and not for gaining own wealth. THAT was my point.

  2. Geoff Fornoy says:

    Jesus was a revolutionary teacher. His ideas shocked and frightened the people of His day. He would probably do the same to us today were He here in person. The sad truth is that the teachings of Jesus are just as revolutionary today as they were when He was here, but we have overlooked their importance. Or, we have failed to make application of them to our lives.

    A man has to be revolutionary to have chosen a tax collector as one of His apostles and used a Samaritan to teach a lesson on brotherhood. Neither one of these actions would please an orthodox Jew. In fact, it could upset him to the degree that he would want to kill. You see, the Jew of that day was a highly prejudiced person. His prejudices were the result of many centuries of development, some of which were based upon being the chosen people of God.

    It was inconceivable to a Jew that God would allow Samaritans and Gentiles be a part of His chosen people. These people were like dogs to the devout Jew.

    But, here comes this Jesus, who was a Jew himself, hobnobbing with all kinds of people all of which the orthodox would exclude. There are tax collectors, prostitutes, the blind, lepers, the rich, the poor, the destitute, the religious, the irreligious, just anyone in fact, everyone. There was not an ounce of prejudice in the Lord.

    Prejudice is an irrational attitude accompanied by hostility toward an individual, a group or a race because they are different and have certain characteristics differing from ours. Prejudice does not make for congeniality and friendliness. It produces violence and disorder.

    Of all people on this earth, Christians should not be prejudiced. Yet, we find that this characteristic is very difficult to overcome and some people seem not to have tried very hard to subdue it.

    When we are the recipient of prejudicial actions or attitudes or statements, we feel frustrated and many times angry because we know how unfair it is. If we feel that way, we should be able to understand how others must feel when we do something in an intolerant way towards others.

    What can we do about prejudice? There are a number of answers to this question. One thing we can do is to learn to express ourselves less about how we might feel. “My dear brothers, take note of this: Everyone should be quick to listen, slow to speak and slow to become angry …” (James 1:19). If we are slow to speak and think well before doing so we will find ourselves saying few prejudicial things. Thinking will help us choose the best words to say. The Proverbs say, “A soft answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger” (Proverbs 15:1).

    The principle set forth in the Golden Rule works well here. “Whatsoever you would that men should do to you, do you even so to them.” None of us would want others to be prejudiced toward us nor to treat us in a prejudiced way, so we do not treat them in a prejudiced way.

    Think about all of these things the next time you feel prejudiced toward someone. If we could remove prejudice our world would be a better place for us to live. Meditate upon your own prejudices for a short time and then make plans to do something constructive to remove them. — Arthur W. Atkinson

    • C.Seamus says:

      Good point. I appreciate the input, but let’s not get all religion-y here. It might be off-topic already, the post was about a guy posting his so-called “Christianity” at the same time glorifying greed, promoting materialism, and calling activists against corruption, “shallow and pathetic”. that was what made me wrote this article.

      There is a link in the word “GUY” that you can click, and that is the FB Wall I am talking about.

  3. poshkitty says:

    interesting debate, but I agree with CSeamus, here is a good read as well-

    http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/04/jesus_event.html

    “He was crucified for speaking against the authorities… He was fighting against the way they exploited the people,” explained Hendricks. “[Jesus was] revolutionary in the sense that he worked to make a very radical upheaval in society.”

    • C.Seamus says:

      Thanks poshkitty.

      Just to clarify-
      REVOLUTIONARY does not mean a REBEL
      SOCIAL CHANGE is not LEFTIST

      and there is nothing wrong with being a leftist (it is actually now considered not politically correct, and not all opposing the government is a leftist)

      FOR THE RECORD- I did not say, “Jesus was a rebel” or “Jesus was a leftist”.
      Jesus was a revolutionary, I said. (if internet laws are well defined, that would be a ground for libel already)

      also, what is it with the wrong connotation that someone who wants change is a rebel? a rebel wants anarchy. a revolutionary wants change. what is wrong with empowerment, development and initializing change of good governance?

      again people, calm down. reread my original post please and lets not get out of context here.

      tolerance to an individual perspective is a virtue across all religions. but tolerance to an evil (like greed for example, or thievery) is scoffed, we are expected to act not be passive

      again, the whole point of the original post-
      Was about a guy who keeps on posting how “Christian” he is but yet he claimed “greed is good”, he promotes materialism, and he declared that those people who opposed corporate greed are “shallow and pathetic”. That was according to his Facebook wall posts. (he could have deleted it after reading this, but nonetheless, that was why I wrote the article)

      Again, careful with what you post on your Facebook Ms.Rodriguez-Guerrero, don’t shout out that I said Jesus was a rebel, because I didn’t. Jesus wanted change and made change, thus, he is a revolutionary, it does not negate his being divine as to what you claim I am implying.

      I do encourage healthy debate here in my blog, and I don’t edit your comments, but claiming something I wrote that I didn’t on your social network is just below the belt, but hey, I respect your God-given freedom.

  4. jake says:

    That’s how people are, a walking sack of contradictions. I mean, humans are faulty machines with flawed logic and bad memory. To make matters worse, holier than thou assholes will keep on reminding you that there really is but a slim hope for humanity. A case of man being naturally good or naturally evil? Who knows?

  5. hmmm… interesting.

    alright. the problem with people is labels and stereotypes. if someone goes against the government, you will be labeled as leftist or worst, terrorist. if you protest against the church’s teachings, you will be labeled as heretic or anti-Christ..enough with the labels. enough with the name-calling. it defeats the purpose of critical thinking. also, i wouldn’t wanna start an extensive hermeneutical discussion about the bible being a literary genre.. it will just rouse more questions, deeming this comment off-topic.

    what we have to emphasize here is the hypocrisy of people; that people would not practice what they preach. if we would look deeper, i believe such person has issues with himself. it’s all about the image really… it’s all about what you want people to think of you. it’s a facade, a mask (reminiscent of Eraserheads’ maskara, carbonstereoxide hehehehe…) if people can’t back their words up with acts of kindness then they must be hollow and blind fanatics who would kill in the name of their religion. just my two-cents worth.

    • C.Seamus says:

      thanks for sticking to the topic Sir Jeff.
      but I would love hear your expounded thoughts on this.
      how come when one is branded- “revolutionary” – closed-minded people equate this to being a “rebel”, as I’ve said, rebels want anarchy, no purpose at all, revolutionaries wanted change, and act for change. I think their image of Jesus is the Jesus who is always praying and crying, not the Jesus I’d like to imagine as being on the streets, with the people, teaching.

  6. thanks for your acknowledgment, seamus.

    it seems that your are very much bothered with the notion of “revolutionary” and “rebel…” if you would ask me, i believe that they are both the same..and that being a rebel does not necessarily equate to anarchy and senseless violence.

    being a rebel requires courage to go against the flow, against the dictates of the society. we cannot easily conclude that for one to rebel, you will have to take arms and wage a struggle against the government or the society in general. rebels do not easily adhere to the norms or traditions; they question them. they do not get swayed by fad; they innovate fashion statements. they do not get satisfied with current technologies; they invent. they do not succumb to ignorance; they dare to think.

    if you would look closely, there’s no difference between revolutionaries and rebels at all. it’s all about the wordplay and loose associations. whilst some people love Steve Jobs in revolutionizing technology, some people would hate let’s say, Che Guevara for his stance against imperialism. while Steve Jobs rebelled against the existing technological systems, Che Guevara on the other hand was revolutionizing social reforms in the countryside of Cuba. It’s like pop vs rock. Justin Bieber vs Kurt Cobain. its how you would associate an idea to a word, be it read or spoken. sadly, they associate the word rebel to leftists (which i see nothing negative about) or worse, anarchists. it’s the effect of the capitalist media. spoonfed information, be it propaganda, lies, or half-truths.

    there’s a problem with how people think. it’s a shepherd-flock morality. wherever the shepherd says, the flock will follow. it’s a bastardized idea of following blindly without question, without thinking. and truth be told, it has been prevalent since time immemorial up to this date.

    i dare say that Jesus is a rebel and a revolutionary. a HOLY REBEL AND REVOLUTIONARY. contrary to some perverted teachings that one should be poor, meek, and hungry, Christ himself fed people, healed the sick, and preached even on the Sabbath. he is an Overman. he overcame himself, and led others to overcome themselves. He rebelled against weakness, against sin, against evil. It is in this light that we need to see Jesus as more than a man, but a divine rebel against the pervading system of his times.

  7. C.Seamus says:

    Great thoughts Jeff. I recognized Wittgenstein, Marx, Habermas and Nietzsche as your sources. You still got it man. Like I mentioned to you, there was a link on the post, on the word “guy”, although I was not trying to give the word “Hypocrites” a face, it was to illustrate that yes, there are people like this guy, who keeps praising his god, then would glorify greed, promote materialism, and declare that activists are “shallow and pathetic”.

  8. that’s the good thing about democracy and ecumenism. we can believe and profess such faith on and about anything. there is a culture of tolerance. don’t be too agitated with his sophomoric attempt at profundity. it just means that the world where he moves in suits him well. he is comfortable. he is at peace with the way he lives. he has a god, and he wants to be rich. filthy rich at that.

    on the contrary, he is not tolerant with others’ beliefs, philosophies, and ideals. given that he is pragmatic, it is not an excuse to ridicule other people’s views on the world. such mindset is the root of corruption and inequality. this is superficial, since amassing wealth and material things is merely transitory. this, i can say, is even more shallow and pathetic.

    • C.Seamus says:

      yun nga talaga what got me eh. he can profess his god and wealth in the same wall for all i care, but brandishing others fighting for righteous causes as “shallow and pathetic”, anyway, live and let live, live and let live man.

Click Here To Comment!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s