Magi Mike's Blog

Another WordPress blog about politics and religion

Not Christian, Rich Christian, Poor Christian, Christian

with 4 comments

“Blessed are the Poor” is not…
”Blessed are the Rich!”

Having read the gospel message of the active life of Christ, just how can American billionaire Republicans and their kin here in the UK succeed in fooling everyone that they can be Christians at all? Yet they pass off the message that the capitalist dog-eat-dog system of treating people as objects for exploitation is compatible with Christ’s teaching of treating people as objects of kindness and love. Nothing seems so easy as the ease by which the rich perpetually fool the poor into believing what is utterly against their best interests, including the nature of Christianity.

Written by mikemagee

25 December, 2011 at 7:08 pm

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Some of us think too highly of ourselves, but others of us have the opposite problem. We have a low opinion of our talents. We don’t think we have any special gift or high purpose. We try to content ourselves with a decent income and simple pleasures. We have liitle sense of a supernatural gifting or calling. We have little vision for making a difference in other people’s lives.
    This is not Jesus wants for us. Jesus doesn’t want us to feel empty and useless. Jesus wants us to experience the power of His spirit, to receive and recognize His special gifting, to put those gifts to work for the benefit of others, and to see other people’s gifts and benefit from them.

    A.Yeshuratnam (@rhetet)

    26 December, 2011 at 4:16 am

  2. Spot on Mike… Jesus spoke about money so much it is scary to me… I have been reading a book by Randy Alcorn titled “Money, Possessions, Eternity.” It has been a great read so far… First Christian book about money that I have found that literally says… give it away!


    2 January, 2012 at 3:51 pm

  3. How do you think that the Essenes would have behaved if they somehow could have realized their desire and wrested the Temple from the hated Sadducees and from Graeco-Roman influence? Do you think they would have continued in their tradition of sanctimonious noble poverty? Or would we have been able to draw even more parallels with the Maccabees?

    Also: knowing that Christianity is in large measure an ancient propaganda effort by Hellenized “Greeks” designed to paint a nice picture of what was going on in the rebellious provinces and thereby influence majority opinion about other “Greeks”: to what degree do you think that attitudes about ancient Jews as a wealthy mercantile, even mercenary, people influenced the “Greek” authors of Jesus to represent him as a lover of rags and penury?

    “The nature of Christianity” is lovey-dovey universalism? Paul and company would be proud, Mike.


    25 January, 2012 at 11:08 am

    • We can criticize Christians for believing natural history is supernatural history (sacred history). We can criticize them because Christian beliefs do not suit our beliefs in general or our temperament. We can criticize them also from Christianity’s own standpoint as their being hypocritical or inconsistent. In the short paragraph here, I am doing the latter. Your first two paragraphs above seem to take the historical critical path, and your third, the personal temperament or opinion path, and so are not directly of any consequence in reply to my point.

      Elsewhere I certainly use the historical argument. Once Christianity or Judaism can be shown to be demonstrably false historically, then Christian belief has been proven to be false, and Christians therefore shown to be superstitious and illogical. My own personal beliefs will be irrelevant to any Christian, just as yours may be. You evidently despise “lovey-dovey universalism”, but many people think it the answer to the world’s ills, and they will simply despise you in turn as an antisocial solipsist.

      Yet, throughout the history of Christendom, Christians at many levels have openly preached and acted contrary to the transparent teachings of the man they all profess to revere as God incarnate. It is a sore spot for them, and they have to wheedle out of such criticism by claiming that all those people were never Christians anyway. Indeed they were not, if the words and deeds of Christ are the criteria of Christianity, but they are not. Paul taught a variation of the mystery religions of the dying and rising god, and Christ’s own moral code was retained only as examples of the impossible acts (for humans) of God. If a Christian deserves the name then they must do as Christ did, and as he taught. If they want to act in some other way they ought to choose a more appropriate name, or accept that they are hypocrites pretending to be what they are not.

      Mike Magee

      25 January, 2012 at 5:39 pm

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: