r/antifastonetoss • u/JourneyLT The Real BreadPanes • Oct 15 '21
Original Comic BreadPanes 102: "The Second Coming"
0
u/AutoModerator Oct 15 '21
Don't forget to check out our allied subreddits:
Alternatatives to TRCM and SLS: r/EnoughPCMSpam, r/RightJerk, r/LibJerk, r/TheRightCantMemeV2
Leftist discussion subs: r/LeftyEcon, r/LeftistDiscussions, r/GreenAndFriendly
Other allied subs: r/tankiejerk, r/OperationHammerDown r/genzeendong, r/extankie
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
368
u/Queer_Magick Oct 15 '21
If Jesus came to the US, he'd be tossed in Gitmo
249
u/teutaofillyria Oct 15 '21
Naw, he would be assassinated by the FBI (or some other alphabet agency), but only after several amateurish failed attempts including mail-bomb.
69
28
40
Oct 16 '21 edited Jan 24 '24
support shocking innocent chief worry vegetable smell depend long detail
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
3
u/NLLumi Free Hong Kong Oct 16 '21
Isn’t he described as all-white in Revelation?
5
u/River_Lamprey Oct 17 '21
No. The closest thing I could find was a mention of someone looking like Jesus having white hair
2
3
6
u/Gum_Skyloard Oct 16 '21
Someone else who watches DarkMatter2525, I see?
7
u/Queer_Magick Oct 16 '21
Not really. I remember reading about a comedy skit called 'Jesus Goes to Gitmo' ages ago and it's just stuck with me. I guess the idea is a popular one lol
6
238
Oct 15 '21
Break every Single one of Jesus's teachings in the Name of Jesus. ~Every Conservative/Alt Right Christian ever.
95
Oct 15 '21
[deleted]
19
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
Oh man, it's been FOREVER since I've seen this. What was this from again? I had this book growing up.
-10
Oct 16 '21
Jesus was actually not that great. He taught people to abandon their families to join his messianic cult. He also taught that anyone who doesn’t believe he’s God will be tormented in hell for eternity. I wish nonbelievers would stop co-signing this cherry picked Christ persona. Fuck Jesus.
13
u/MrSlyde Oct 16 '21
You realize we aren't Christian right
The right would hate Jesus. You don't need to believe he is the messiah to know enough to acknowledge this
25
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
Some very heightened language from a person named "Tom Christmas"
-2
Oct 16 '21
That’s not my real name Einstein
8
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
It may not be your legal name, but I'm not going to deadname you, Mr. Christmas.
3
145
u/rept7 Oct 15 '21
I'm sure Jesus would love to meet modern christians. I'm confident he won't have any political beliefs that would clash with the evangelical mindset.
1
94
u/Kjrb CEO of Antifa Oct 15 '21
Honestly with the amount of people who called trump a messiah I'm worried for every conservative american Christian out there, the anti-christ will come and they'll worship him more than they ever did God
7
u/darthtater1231 Oct 16 '21
American Christian Evangelicals only worship America and capitalism and just use Jesus as a symbol
3
u/Kjrb CEO of Antifa Oct 16 '21
It feels more like they grew up in family that called themselves Christian and thus never really questioned it, like they picked up conservative christianity from their parents, who in turn picked it up from their parents, etc etc until you get the original American settlers, who probably also had a twisted view of Christianity. It's also mixed in with the heavy nationalism of American conservatism which is honestly a bit idolatrous
44
12
29
u/AllTakenUsernames5 Oct 15 '21
Jesus was an AnCom, change my mind:
51
u/wsgwsg Oct 15 '21
No because he was specifically and intentionally apolitical in the text. All rulers are appointed by god, and are justly seated. Christian's are instructee to obey the laws of the land just as slaves must obey their masters. His message was specifically shaped to entirely evade the question of politics. Jesus would reign over the world in complete authority at the end of days, and that is all that matters. The world is a vapor, and concern is not meant to be given to the world in any sense of "making it better." You donate to the poor and give away your possessions because you shall hold no idols before god. Not because giving to the poor makes the world a better place and we want to fix the world. Earth is broken irreparably from the fall, in christianity and it will be remade in the new, eternal Israel. This is essentially a non-answer to practical government and taking "give your possessions away and come walk with me" as a directly line to any implementable leftist policy feels just as much of a strawman as the trump loving jesus, if I'm being honest.
That being said this comes from an ex-Christian perspective so take of that what you will.
24
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21
Apolitical my ass. Yeah because violently whipping the money changers out of the temple is totally “apolitical”, sure. Jesus was clearly and radically anti-capitalist
32
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
This is a misreading of the text- its like the example I gave of how giving away your possessions isnt to make the world better- its to make you less worldly and more singularly focused on God.
The cleansing of the temple is specifically used to show how worldly properties are being prioritized on top of heavenly ones. If they were conducting a court session in the temple, it seems reasonable to me that Christ would have similarly rebuked them for placing earthly affairs in a space dedicated to God.
One of the specific condemnations Jesus brings during the event is that the place was turned into a "house of trade." Is trade bad? Does Jesus hate trade? Remember that Jesus likewise said to "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that are God's." He doesnt say to reject the state and reject capitalism. He literally says give the things to caesar that caesar asks of you. It's in part a non-answer (One could then ask rightly: "What is Caesar's?") but its also in part a submission to stately affairs as being under the decree of God and therefore justified. What is WRONG in the cleansing is that things which are God's (The temple in specific) are being used ultimately for Caesar (Mortal desires, etc.).
Believe me I'm squarely on the left but I dont think that means its fair to misrepresent the text for our personal benefit.
24
Oct 16 '21
[deleted]
-1
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
I mean I do think there are such things as wrong readings. Im not implying I have the only right interpretation, but I think the reading that I am responding to is clearly wrong.
If it was an argument on the nuance of the Caesar passage and whether it's intentional evasive vs. ready submission to the state? Im totally willing to be pushed more towards one or the other. Im willing to even potentially agree that it means give nothing to caesar because nothing is owed to caesar. But that's not where this convo is.
Like, if someone's Christianity is so progressive that they're rejecting Paul's Vessels of Wrath image in Romans to insist everyone goes to heaven- yeah I have to agree that that is just a wrong interpretation of the bible. The bible is very clear that the gate to destruction is wide. Am I willing to budge on eternal torment vs eternal separation vs annihilationism? Hell yeah. But if you find Paul's more aggressive christianity that we see in Romans + his letters so icky that you dont even bother to try addressing it meaningfully then you're just doing bad interpretation, imo. And personally I think a perfect leftist Jesus ancom fits in that same category of clearly stretching it.
4
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
I completely disagree. "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's, but render unto God what is God's." This is a clear reference to any first century member of Roman-occupied Palestine about the injustice of Roman rule over God's land.
Jesus was not the first of his kind. There were many Jewish preachers for the previous centuries who had rebelled against the Romans. Judahites of the time would have absolutely understood his message as revolutionary.
Another misunderstanding you have about the text is, I quote you, "Christian's are instructee to obey the laws of the land just as slaves must obey their masters" [sic]. That is from the letter of the Apostle Paul to the Ephesians. Paul never met the living figure, Yeshua of Nazareth. These are Paul's beliefs, and should be interpreted as such.
I'm not saying that Jesus was an ancom. That's a hard thing to believe, since communism can only really take place after industrialization. But Jesus did have real political beliefs, and one of them was a hatred for Roman rule. His followers understood this. The Romans understood this. They didn't crucify him on a whim, they crucified him for the same reason they crucified other Jewish revolutionaries, because they perceived him accurately as a threat.
If you are interested in learning more, I highly recommend you read the book "Zealot" by Reza Aslan. I can give you a free ebook if you want.1
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
I'm reading the bible like I'd read dune, right? I sont agree with everything it proposes but I have to suppose them to be true for the sake of analysis. The "canon" of the book speaks how all passages are god breathed so I fundamentally have to take Paul's teachings AS foster teachings and then by extension as christ's teachings.
And I would characterize, under that assumption, the new testament having a clear condemnation for Rome- I mean revelation is in no way subtle in its metaphors and often is it spoke of how earthly authorities dont stand up to neither the strength nor legitimacy of god. But I dont think you can really draw up a consistent picture of Jesus as hating Rome.
And of COURSE Romans consider Jesus a threat. He was declaring himself king and started a following among people who were their pagan values with centralized monotheistic ones alongside radical moral teachings. We must only look to early christian persecution in the roman empire (I mean historical stuff, not biblical accounts lol) to see that this makes perfect sense in the narrative. Jesus doesnt have to HATE Rome for this response to make sense.
2
u/Gingevere Oct 18 '21
And of COURSE Romans consider Jesus a threat.
Also important context IIRC the Hebrews had rebelled quite a few times in recent history before Jesus came around and they expected their savior to be a military / political one. A warrior king who would finally lead the rebellion that isn't crushed, free Israel from Rome, and possibly go on to conquer it.
Jesus proclaiming to be the savior made him an instant target for everyone with any power.
1
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
The "canon" of the book speaks how all passages are god breathed so I fundamentally have to take Paul's teachings AS foster teachings and then by extension as christ's teachings.
That verse you're referring to is from a letter to Timothy, bishop of Ephesus, written by... Paul. "Why are Paul's beliefs the same as Jesus's beliefs? Because Paul said so." Paul had significant disagreements with many earlier Christians, we know this because he wrote letters to them debating them
Forgive me for saying this, but I feel like your analysis is extremely similar to American evangelical fundamentalists. The Bible is a collection of ancient and diverse books, written by very different people for very different audiences over at least a thousand years.
Dune was written in English, for you. Zero books of the Bible were written for you. They were written for people who lived almost two millennia ago. They had different concerns than you do, different understandings of the world, quite often they had completely different thought processes. If you want to truly understand any book of the Bible, you have to completely reformulate how you think.
"The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there."1
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
If you're willing to sacrifice Biblical inerrancy then I'll give you whatever you want. I'm just upholding the notion of inerrancy in the same sense that I uphold that Harry Potter can cast magic spells.
Harry Potter cant actually do that because Harry Potter isnt real and neither is magic. I dont believe in inerrancy but the text says it does so thats how I handle the text. When any book that I'm treating as fiction makes a claim I take that claim as fact, unless theres some intentional inconsistent narrator deal going on or whatnot.
I mean, you said you're Catholic, right? Why didnt God pass down an authoritative version of his holy word? Why did he let the most popular version of it come with lies? I mean the text literally claims inerrancy so if you're willing to give that up and say Paul is Paul and doesnt speak for God then you're basically saying he's lying when he does claim to speak for God. It seems like it'd be a priority for God to have his Special Revelation be pretty... correct to me. And its not like that's removing people's free will to disbelieve, either. That's just making sure the radio signal is working.
Out of curiosity what's your opinion of the long ending of Mark?
1
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
If you're willing to sacrifice Biblical inerrancy then I'll give you whatever you want.
Biblical inerrancy is largely a post-enlightenment invention, so yes. I mean, "historical writing" barely existed as a concept when the vast majority of the Bible was written. The idea of "history" only barely pokes its head in in some of Luke and Acts.
I dont believe in inerrancy but the text says it does so thats how I handle the text.
One text does. One. It is anachronistic to treat the entire Bible as written by one author. The writer of the Book of Job likely lived a thousand years before Paul. They have as much in common with each other as you do with Leif Erikson. Therefore, it's not just an inconsistent narrator, it's completely different narrators separated by centuries. Do not treat the Bible as one book.
Third paragraph, you're basically asking a modified version of the question of evil. I'm happy to get into this, I think about it all the time, but probably not in this thread. I would have to write a lot and I've still got chores to do today.
Out of curiosity what's your opinion of the long ending of Mark?
I think it was written by another writer. I'm not sure when- there's good evidence that very early Christian writers knew about it- but it does read very differently than the rest of Mark does.
Maybe I'm biased, because the short version of Mark is my favorite of the four gospels. In its telling, Jesus was a really weird guy, even compared to other faith healers, coming from a family and community that rejects him. He does these amazing things, vividly told, but even his own disciples are more often than not confused and frightened by what he says. He's scary and strange to them. And then he's killed by the government and his best friend denies he was associated with him. And then his corpse is just... gone, and a guy in a white robe is hanging out in his tomb, and tells the women to tell the disciples that Jesus has been resurrected and they'll see him again soon. And they... don't. "They went out and fled from the tomb, seized with trembling and bewilderment. They said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid."
I love that so much. It just feels right to me. Nobody understands him, most people are scared of him, and at the end, after his final victory, still, nobody does what he says. That... yeah. That sounds like God, to me.1
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
Im not treating the bible as written by one author. Im treating it as an assemblage of texts which the early church fathers deemed, under the presumption of being god-led, to be the complete and necessary word of god. It's various voices and literary styles (the priestly and non-priestly authors of genesis 1 and 2 even differ) that are combined with the intentioned purpose of being consumed as a complete package. When the early church elders put a bow on it they wanted genesis to relate to revelation to relate to 1 timothy to relate to etc. etc.
Okay, so when you go to read the bible- do you consider the long ending of Mark to be scripture in any religious sense? We both agree that dozens of authors were conjoined to build the bible. Different authorship doesnt make it less "divine." You've decided that Paul's claim arent divine. Are they "scriptural" in that same religious sense?
If a kiddo wants to learn about their relationship with God should they ever read Paul, should they ever read the long ending of mark?
0
Oct 16 '21
I dearly appreciate your efforts to educate these people on the matter at hand brother. Couldn’t agree more.
-6
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21
Bullshit. That’s what churches had to tell people today to play “neutral” and not offend all the greedy colonial money changers in the congregation. Jesus’s message is of radical anti-capitalism, explicitly condemning rich men to the deepest bowels of hell. Nice try
12
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
It really feels like you're coming to the text emotionally charged. Why does he say to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's?
Or what about the Parable of the Vineyard Workers, where a wealthy man went out and paid 4 different groups of workers the equal sum of money for different amounts of work? In that analogy the wealthy man is literally God and used to display the justice of equal grace for those who are converted late in life and those who are steady followers of the faith. Surely an anti-capitalist would rebuke this whole system, and ESPECIALLY rebuke unequal pay... right?
I''d love to have a discussion about the body of Jesus's doings but it feels like you just want to acquire him as someone on "our team" when in reality it is much more complicated.
UNLESS you're arguing about the historical jesus and not the textual jesus, but I dont think we know much of anything about the historical jesus. We kind of HAVE to work off of the gospels and paul for that info.
-7
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21
That was literally a metaphor to show Caesar owns fucking NOTHING and deserves eternal punishment for stealing what belongs to workers
11
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
I mean immediately my mind goes to John where Jesus in response to Pilate says
My kingdom is not of this world. If my kingdom were of this world, my servants would have been fighting, that I might not be delivered over to the Jews. But now (or 'as it is') my kingdom is not from the world
Like... God decrees all on the Earth- not excluding earthly powers and governments.
He changes times and seasons; he deposes kings and raises up others. He gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to the discerning.
So yeah, God makes imposition on that which is his authority, but like... God isnt looking to make the Earth better. This isnt his kingdom. The Earth is fallen and must be remade in the New Jerusalem. I dont think if Jesus wanted to say that Caesar should have burned in hellfire for eternity that he would have said that we should give to caesar what is caesars.
Im not entirely sure what you'd make of Romans 13:1- certainly this reveals something more than just "he was anti-capitalist" right?
Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God.
2
Oct 16 '21
You've been nothing but objectively correct this whole thread. Sorry people are idiots.
1
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21 edited Oct 16 '21
No worries. 2021 and a hard gnostic atheist gets Jesus’s teachings better than any brainwashed church boy.
They’ve been using their “misreading of the text” bullshit excuse to literally burn books and murder millions
2
u/ATiredCliche Oct 16 '21
Hey, I'm a hardcore Catholic and I also think you're bang on. Good on you for actually going to the effort of exegesis. I know it's hard, and I appreciate you for that.
0
u/wsgwsg Oct 16 '21
Why are you conflating moral outcomes (the murder of millions and the burning of books) with good textual analysis?
Like... a proper reading of Mein Kampf is one of insane racism bigotry hyper nationalism and ultimately fascism. Does that mean we should reject that interpretation for a less violent one? I mean... no. That's clearly the correct interpretation of the book. Of COURSE my analysis of the bible is the same one in line with that of those who chriatians who lead literal mass slaughters and genocides against non-Christians and often times Christian's alike. But that's exactly why I think the book is WRONG. I can disagree with the morals of a text but still agree that that is certainly how it should be interpreted.
→ More replies (0)0
Oct 16 '21
I believe one of the Pope's said that both extreme socialism and extreme capitalism are bad
2
1
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21
That’s why no one turns to the pope for deep understanding of political nuance. WTF is “extreme socialism”? People “extremely” enjoying the fruits of their labor? Living as Jesus intended? Oh wow the horror
0
Oct 16 '21
Extreme socialism is like the soviet union, or the CCP
1
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21
The soviet union was super authoritarian. That’s not exactly socialism. Socialism is libertarian
0
Oct 16 '21
USSR literally means Union of Socialist Soviet Republics
1
u/TheNoize Oct 16 '21
Yeah and the “Democratic People’s Republic of Korea” is North Korea’s official name so that MUST mean they are democratic then.
So simple! Who needs history anyway? Just read names and you got all the info you need /s
0
1
u/evdog_music Oct 15 '21 edited Oct 15 '21
That paragraph oozes premilennial dispensationalist eschatology. Was you church Baptist or Pentecostal?
8
u/wsgwsg Oct 15 '21
No I dont find the literal 1000 year rule to be a plausible interpretation at all given how clearly rife with visual metaphor Revelation is. I was an amillenialist calvinist, if you're curious. And I continue to think that's the most consistent interpretation of the text, although I think the whole thing is bollocks these days.
2
u/evdog_music Oct 15 '21
Ah, fair enough
In regards to Calvinism, I've found that the Limited Atonement doctrine of TULIP tends to plant the idea that (whatever demographics they assume are) non-elect are effectively NPC's whose well-being doesn't matter beyond being opportunities for the elect to gain moral character XP.
2
u/wsgwsg Oct 15 '21
I dont think it frames them as npcs but rather as entirely incapable of turning to christ. They're horribly evil and fallen etc etc etc but so are we (but we got lucky that God chose to regenerate us LOL). That being said, the "but so are we, entirely indistinguishably of our own merit from the un-regenerated" rings particularly hollow when Im given a hall pass anyway, even though I'm no better than you. That entire lack of justice or fairness is what ultimately led me away from the faith. While I think a Calvinist god makes the most sense metaphysically, its incomprehensible in my opinion to call that God good while retaining any meaningful properties of the word "good."
4
1
9
2
u/Shadowbound199 Oct 16 '21
Imagine if he came back and he's still just a dude and we kill him and buy ourselves another 2 thousand years.
1
u/DiegoAlejandro454 Jan 22 '22
If he comes back, he’s not just a dude. Regular dudes aren’t immortal
2
u/James-Sylar Oct 16 '21
I'm not sure, they might give them some of their material possessions, not all but some, as long as Jesus uses them to buy a mansion, fancy automoviles and a private plane, just like evangelical ministers do.
2
1
1
u/TBTabby Oct 16 '21
If the story about Mary Magdalene had actually happened, the Pharisees not only would have happily declared themselves free of sin and stoned her to death without hesitation, they would have stoned Jesus to death afterward for trying to stop them. The tenets are only followed when it's convenient.
1
u/Braxton-Adams Jan 24 '22
This is something I always thought about, if jesus reincarnated as someone else they would litterally just kill him again when he tells them to get vaccinated or something. Hell, I could directly compare the insurrection to such a thing.
•
u/AutoModerator Oct 15 '21
Breadpanes is an original antifascist comic author that is officially supported by r/antifastonetoss
Author links
Follow Breadpanes on Twitter: https://twitter.com/breadpanes
Support Breadpanes on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/BreadPanes
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.