Communism “Very Similar” to Christianity, Putin Claims

[Swordsmyth]

No, But I can reject the premise on the basis of History.

The Russian Church and Russian State predated communism.
Christianity Predated Communism

Any alleged similarity comes from borrowing from Christianity..

I would not expect Mr. Putin to say anything so dumb, so I suspect a great deal of spin.

How about RT?

Putin: Communist ideology similar to Christianity, Lenin’s body like saintly relics

https://www.rt.com/news/415883-putin...-christianity/



HB's article confirms the OP

'Communism like Christianity and Lenin is a SAINT' claims Putin in shocking interview

https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/904717/Putin-communism-christianity-Russia-Lenin-saint-bolshevik-revolution-Stalin-atheism-news

[Swordsmyth]

Except that's not why it's not credible. There are lots of sources I don't agree with that are credible. New American is known for playing fast and loose with facts and its strong bias.

LOL

[pcosmar]

@Swordsmyth

I reject the premise.. for the valid reasons stated.

That Putin is playing politics with the people (religious and otherwise) that is his business.

Communism sometimes sounds like Christianity,, because it borrowed from it.
(not the other way round)
And the Church and State were mixed from the first recorded government,,

and i believe an old error of the modern church.

[Sola_Fide]

Ronin Truth must have accidentally logged on this account.

Facts are facts.

[Swordsmyth]

@Swordsmyth

I reject the premise.. for the valid reasons stated.

That Putin is playing politics with the people (religious and otherwise) that is his business.

Communism sometimes sounds like Christianity,, because it borrowed from it.
(not the other way round)
And the Church and State were mixed from the first recorded government,,

and i believe an old error of the modern church.

I understand your position, YOU have a valid point of view whether I agree or not.

I say there is no such thing as an EX-KGB agent any more than there is an EX-CIA agent.

[Sola_Fide]

Don't confuse terms.

What's the confusion? Socialism has as its final authority man in the state. Nietzsche said the State is god on earth.

[RJB]

Facts are facts.

The facts are that Bolshevism's war on Christianity killed 50 million people. To equate the Orthodox Church to that is simply trolling for attention.

[Sola_Fide]

LOL

You can laugh all you want. Facts are facts.

[pcosmar]

I understand your position, YOU have a valid point of view whether I agree or not.

I say there is no such thing as an EX-KGB agent any more than there is an EX-CIA agent.

Ok,, Possible and likely. and irrelevant.

The US is every bit as socialist as Russia. only a somewhat different organization.
Russia's attempt with communism failed as did China's. and both are as socialist and as capitalist as the US.

Putin playing politics with both religious and patriotic people in his own country is not even relevant on a news scale.

[Sola_Fide]

Communist Party Unites With Orthodox Church

https://www.google.com/amp/www.aljaz...075756966.html

[Raginfridus]

What's the confusion? Socialism has as its final authority man in the state. Nietzsche said the State is god on earth.

Then if socialism and Christianity are so similar, what's your argument exactly? Nobody said they're the same thing (in most cases).

[Superfluous Man]

Putin doesn't know the first thing about Christianity.

[Superfluous Man]

Ideologically they're similar, that's fair, and one reason I'll have nothing to do with it. Jon Hus and other heretics are forerunners of progressives; socialism is just Christianity w/o a God. A great book on the development of progressivism, socialism, and Utopias for the inquiring is Igor Shafarevich's The Socialist Phenomenon.

Ideologically, they are not similar.

In what way was John Hus a forerunner of the progressives? He lived 500 years before them, and was hardly one of their influences.

[nikcers]

I understand your position, YOU have a valid point of view whether I agree or not.

I say there is no such thing as an EX-KGB agent any more than there is an EX-CIA agent.

I keep saying that there is no such thing as an ex wife but now she has a restraining order out on me.

[Sola_Fide]

Then if socialism and Christianity are so similar, what's your argument exactly? Nobody said they're the same thing (in most cases).

They aren't similar at all. They have different gods.

[sparebulb]

Putin doesn't know the first thing about Christianity.

I'm sure he knows more than you think.

Regardless of Putin's professed faith, it is a fact that the Soviet education system extensively taught divinity with the goal of discrediting it.

I think it is likely that most Russians know more about Christianity than most 'murikans.

[tod evans]

I think it is likely that most Russians know more about Christianity than most 'murikans.

From what I know they certainly act as if they do...

I've never heard an Orthodox or a Russian tell Christians they were going to hell for not following their 'traditions...

Nor have I ever heard an Orthodox or a Russian tell another Christian that they weren't a Christian.

[Superfluous Man]

I'm sure he knows more than you think.

Being propagandized about a topic isn't the same as knowing it.

[RJB]

Putin doesn't know the first thing about Christianity.

Oh wow! How did you acquire this insight into the hearts of men? Are you his wife?

[Raginfridus]

Wycliffe and his successor Hus were pure Statists. The King (the state) to Wycliffe was answerable only to God, an idea that developed into state sovereignty w/o the accoutrements of religion, until eventually it was OK to talk about states w/o God or Church, where every-man's a King. Show me a socialist prog, and I'll show you a Christian w/o a God.

[sparebulb]

Being propagandized about a topic isn't the same as knowing it.

I'm just going to assume that Putin is way more knowledgeable about everything than you.

Sorry, but it is just a fact.

[Superfluous Man]

Wycliffe and his successor Hus were pure Statists. The King (the state) to Wycliffe was answerable only to God

As opposed to what alternative? The king being answerable to the pope, and the pope to God?

If every individual is answerable only to God, then it stands to reason that this is true of kings as well as commoners. That's not statism. And what does it have to do with progressivism anyway?

[goldenequity]

Russian Market @russian_market
Vladimir Putin took a dip in the icy waters of Russia's Lake Seliger during the celebration of Epiphany.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DT4hOoiWAAE2ZOh.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DT4hOosX4AA6nip.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DT4hOomW0AApjPN.jpg:large

U.S. consul general in Vladivostok joins in Epiphany bathing.

[Superfluous Man]

Wycliffe and his successor Hus were pure Statists.

Could you cite the writings of theirs where they advocate statism, so I can see for myself if that's an accurate reflection of what they said?

[r3volution 3.0]

Putin's always been part of the relatively pro-market, anti-communist faction in Russian politics, so this is disappointing...

...on the other hand, it's probably just politicking, as @heavenlyboy34 said, and doesn't really mean much.

Nietzsche said the State is god on earth.

Hegel, not Nietzsche

In what way was John Hus a forerunner of the progressives?

There is a strong historical and ideological connection between low-church Christianity and leftism. Ecclesiastical, political, and economic egalitarianism are natural bedfellows: no bishop, no king, no capitalist. The Taborites (unleashed by Hus) and the Progressives (outgrowth of American low-church Protestantism) are examples. Of course this doesn't mean that being a low-church Christian requires being a leftist, nor vice versa; it's only a tendency.

[Superfluous Man]

There is a strong historical and ideological connection between low-church Christianity and leftism.

That's not what I asked.

John Hus lived in the 1400's. I don't see how you can connect the Taborites with 20th century progressives.

ETA: Also, note how you and Raginfridus are both trying to connect Hus with modern leftism by opposite claims. He says Hus, following Wycliffe, taught statism by way of increasing the belief in the king's divine right to rule. You mention "no king" as an element of his contribution to leftism.

I don't know which of you is right, because I don't recall ever reading anything he taught about kings, and I don't believe that a doctrine about the state was a central part of his teaching. But whatever the case, I highly doubt any connection between him (however he fit into the politics of his day) and modern leftism as we understand it.

[Sola_Fide]

Putin's always been part of the relatively pro-market, anti-communist faction in Russian politics, so this is disappointing...

...on the other hand, it's probably just politicking, as @heavenlyboy34 said, and doesn't really mean much.



Hegel, not Nietzsche



There is a strong historical and ideological connection between low-church Christianity and leftism. Ecclesiastical, political, and economic egalitarianism are natural bedfellows: no bishop, no king, no capitalist. The Taborites (unleashed by Hus) and the Progressives (outgrowth of American low-church Protestantism) are examples. Of course this doesn't mean that being a low-church Christian requires being a leftist, nor vice versa; it's only a tendency.

Yes, you're right. It was Nietzsche that said there is nothing in this world except the will to power.

You are right as well that there is a connection between low church Protestantism and statism, but there is a connection between every religion, including atheism, and statism. Statism, in one form or another, is the reality of our history and world.

But in the reformation, you can't deny that ecclesiastical decentralization fed into a greater decentralization in all the rest of life. The seeds of federalism came out of that ecclesiastical decentralization.

[r3volution 3.0]

there is a connection between low church Protestantism and statism, but there is a connection between every religion

There is a unique connection between low-church religion and leftism. As I said, ecclesiastical leveling often becomes political leveling (democracy) and economic leveling (socialism). You see this with the revolutionary groups of medieval Europe (Taborites, coercive Anabaptists); the radicals of the English Revolution (Diggers, Fifth Monarchy Men: even the mainstream Parliamentarians); the republican-leaning Huguenots in early-modern France; the French philosophes that generated the revolutionary ideology of the 18th century (e.g. Rousseau); and the 19th century American Republicans (soon to become Progressives). There's nothing comparable for high church Christianity, whether Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or even relatively high-church Protestantism (e.g. Anglicanism). I should note that this high-church/low-church distinction isn't unique to Christianity (it really has nothing to do with Christian theology). The same trends are evident in Mazdakism, a low-church version of Zorostrianism that generated a communist movement in ancient Persia.

But in the reformation, you can't deny that ecclesiastical decentralization fed into a greater decentralization in all the rest of life

If by decentralization you mean egalitarian tendencies, then yes, that's precisely my point.

The seeds of federalism came out of that ecclesiastical decentralization.

How so?

John Hus lived in the 1400's. I don't see how you can connect the Taborites with 20th century progressives.

Martin Luther was separated from Christ by fifteen centuries; does this mean there's no relation?

Once again, teachings such as those of Hus (i.e. low church teachings) tend to generate political and economic egalitarianism.

Hus (church leveling) --> Taborites (political/economic leveling)

Yankee Pietism (church levelling) --> Progressives (political/economic leveling)

[Sola_Fide]

There is a unique connection between low-church religion and leftism. As I said, ecclesiastical leveling often becomes political leveling (democracy) and economic leveling (socialism). You see this with the revolutionary groups of medieval Europe (Taborites, coercive Anabaptists); the radicals of the English Revolution (Diggers, Fifth Monarchy Men: even the mainstream Parliamentarians); the republican-leaning Huguenots in early-modern France; the French philosophes that generated the revolutionary ideology of the 18th century (e.g. Rousseau); and the 19th century American Republicans (soon to become Progressives). There's nothing comparable for high church Christianity, whether Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or even relatively high-church Protestantism (e.g. Anglicanism). I should note that this high-church/low-church distinction isn't unique to Christianity (it really has nothing to do with Christian theology). The same trends are evident in Mazdakism, a low-church version of Zorostrianism that generated a communist movement in ancient Persia.



If by decentralization you mean egalitarian tendencies, then yes, that's precisely my point.



How so?



Martin Luther was separated from Christ by fifteen centuries; does this mean there's no relation?

Once again, teachings such as those of Hus (i.e. low church teachings) tend to generate political and economic egalitarianism.

Hus (church leveling) --> Taborites (political/economic leveling)

Yankee Pietism (church levelling) --> Progressives (political/economic leveling)

No. Egalitarianism came out of enlightenment thinking, pantheism and atheism. The violent French Revolution was atheistic egalitarianism. Then when you go to the low church Calvinistic Baptists in early America, you see an insistence on liberty (but not egalitarianism). Read the Danbury Baptist letter to Thomas Jefferson.

[Sola_Fide]

There is a unique connection between low-church religion and leftism. As I said, ecclesiastical leveling often becomes political leveling (democracy) and economic leveling (socialism). You see this with the revolutionary groups of medieval Europe (Taborites, coercive Anabaptists); the radicals of the English Revolution (Diggers, Fifth Monarchy Men: even the mainstream Parliamentarians); the republican-leaning Huguenots in early-modern France; the French philosophes that generated the revolutionary ideology of the 18th century (e.g. Rousseau); and the 19th century American Republicans (soon to become Progressives). There's nothing comparable for high church Christianity, whether Catholicism, Orthodoxy, or even relatively high-church Protestantism (e.g. Anglicanism). I should note that this high-church/low-church distinction isn't unique to Christianity (it really has nothing to do with Christian theology). The same trends are evident in Mazdakism, a low-church version of Zorostrianism that generated a communist movement in ancient Persia.



If by decentralization you mean egalitarian tendencies, then yes, that's precisely my point.



How so?



Martin Luther was separated from Christ by fifteen centuries; does this mean there's no relation?

Once again, teachings such as those of Hus (i.e. low church teachings) tend to generate political and economic egalitarianism.

Hus (church leveling) --> Taborites (political/economic leveling)

Yankee Pietism (church levelling) --> Progressives (political/economic leveling)

How did the seeds of federalism come out of the Reformations ecclesiastical decentralization? Read any of the several Presbyterian or Baptist Constitutions from the time period or shortly after. You can see the model for our own Constitution very clearly. This has been cited by several people.

And I'm not saying that is a good or bad thing, I'm a voluntarist, I don't think written Constitutions mean anything in the grand scheme of things. But it is the history.