Is Christianity Compatible With Free And Healthy Human Social Systems?

 

"Christianity" is just a public domain, corporate label.

Typically, it's used by any company producing ideological cookies ... predicated on superceding (and building over the dead remains of) Second Temple, Torah-centered Israelites .... replacing that *cult with a new cult-contact (one that the legendary Jesus of Gospel mythos never actually tried to institute) between The God of Abraham vs humanity. [* a Master-Race-minded, Iron Age, patriarchal, henotheistic, authoritarian, sexist, ethically-racist, Nation-less Nationalist, xenophobic, antagonistic, nomadic, Major Personality Disorders-based, fictional-history-based, scapegoating cult] Are any of the many Christianities compatible with *free and healthy human social systems? ["Free", within the boundaries of "do no harm"] No. No, they are not. No human will ever be qualified to relay (to other humans) a theoretically perfect message from a theoretically perfect "Being". Nor did any of the bible oral story weavers, writers, editors, story cherrypickers, translators, theologians, preachers, or endorers ... ever actually understand what a healthy relationship looks like. When we dignify the premise itself, that any human was ever special enough to hear something from a literal "God" that you and I were not qualified to hear directly from that "God", ... we are then feeding this idea into the collective consciousness of human societies. Any society that treats that as a reasonable and true method of: * any such "God" * relaying any obligating messages at all * to humanity, ... has then created or maintained a premise. A pedestal for every Frank Turek, German Mustache Man, or Heritage Foundation to stand upon, ... as "The Voice" of an unquestionable moral authority. Even "Moral authority" itself is a thought-stopping gimmick and a Psy-Op, designed to nullify people's cognitive, emotional, and relational autonomy. In all its forms, it is a form of psychological violence, in that it is always part of an attempt (serves no other function) than to bypass consent, to generate slave-mindedness, as a means to colonize minds; bending those minds to the will of the human voice that claims to be the channeled voice of "God". This has never been and could not ever be a safe-enough thing for anyone to dignify. If an all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful BEING exists, it could not be all-good while simultaneously allowing such extremes of non-consenting suffering. Nor would it be ethical, nor would it be strategically sound, to rely on something like "Holy Books" to relay unsigned I.O.Us to humanity, FOR SALE at the low-low price of allowing random fallible dudes (when they aren't too busy pooping) to dictate demands on the premise of "moral authority" over every person's respective life's journey and personal identity. It is not reasonable for progressive Christians to expect or argue with conservative Biblical ideologues that those ideologues should adopt a progressive filter and lens for reading whichever versions of **a Bible** you want to call "the Bible". The worst versions of Christianity are mostly correct about the very obvious intentions of the writers when it comes to social values and behavioral norms. The best versions of Christianity are just people who have grown enough to realize those views and norms are bad ... but not enough yet .. to realize they're picking out sweet-corn for daily consumption, ... from a bowl they ought to flush.