Regarding: praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

by **Lysander Spooner** » Sun Oct 29, 2006 4:07 pm

James Redford, There's nothing on a Sunday morning like a little anarchist-Jesus after reading through some of your collection of statist-Christian horrors ( <a href="http://p216.ezboard.com/frigorousintuitionfrm10.showMessage?topicID=6721.topic">p216.ezboard.com/frigorou...6721.topic</a> ). I skipped up to your "Jesus on Taxes" chapter and would like to make you aware of a keen insight on this that I learned from a true anarchist named Geoffrey Stewart. Back about 25 years ago, probably at some sort of socialist anarchist anti-tax protest, Geoffrey handed me one of his "Jesus as a Tax-Resisting Anarchist" essays. His essay was so compelling that I made many copies and recopies of it over the years and distributed it widely. I still have a bunch of copies stashed somewhere and someday I must transcribe it to the net. The original text is about 8 pages I think of elegant hand script. In Geoffrey's essay he pointed to the significance of Caesar, Caesar's image, and Caesar's image on the coin relative to the issue of resisting Roman taxation. In your essay you say: "Simply because the denari have Caesar’s name and image on them no more make them his than one carving their name into the back of a stolen TV set makes it theirs. Yet everything Caesar has has been taken by theft and extortion, therefore nothing is rightly his." Geoffrey makes these 2 points: 1. Caesar explicity claimed to be a god and demanded to be worshiped as a diety. This was a violation of the Jews 1st Commandment. 2. Therefore, Caesar's image was a graven image of a false god. This was a violation of the 2nd Commandment. So, Caesar's image on the coin means that Jesus is saying render to a false god what a false god has coming to him. Jesus is not leaving open the question of whether Caesar has anything coming to him. The fact that his image is on the coin proves that he has nothing coming to him because the coin itself is a false idol. * * * Your essay made me wonder about Geoffrey Stewart, so I Googled him and found this interesting passage: <a href="http://www.tortuga.com/archives/library/28meditations/28med14.pdf">www.tortuga.com/archives/...8med14.pdf</a> "...Well, that was a very good change. It was about Hiroshima Day of 1981. I had always been aware of Hiroshima day. When I was in Chicago as a student in the 1950's I met a beautiful black man, an anarchist named Geoffrey Stewart, who was a true living anarchist. He never took a ride on a bus, because it was paid for by taxes: that meant government, and he did not believe in government. "So he would walk across the city of Chicago, which is a very large city, carrying big shopping bags full of anarchist pamphlets. In 1957 he was the only man I knew who was willing to burn the American flag anywhere. He had been thrown in jail for resisting the draft during the Second World War, and he was released from jail because once he was in jail he went on a fast, and the U.S. Army didn't want to have his death on their hands. He was a neat man. He always signed any letter or anything he wrote as being such and such a date in the Year of the Bomb. So in 1957, after August 6th, it was the Year of the Bomb 12. So I took up this idea of his. I had been very impressed by the explosion of the bomb in the first place. I remember when the bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, because all of my favorite radio shows were canceled that day for a special report. After I heard the report I couldn't believe what I heard. Of course it was much worse for the people in Hiroshima. So ever since I met Geoffrey Stewart I kept all my dates not as Year of the Bomb but as AH, After Hiroshima. So when I moved into the condominium of Bolon Ik it was the year 36 AH...." * * * Bringing this back around to the crimes-of-the-Christians, I believe that--ironically--the Nagasaki bomb was exploded directly above the largest Christian church in all of Asia by some accounts. And since most modern so-called Christians worship the bomb of the state, it is probably fitting that we measure our dates from its explosion rather than the birth date of a tax-resisting anarchist.

by **James Redford** » Sun Oct 29, 2006 7:00 pm

Hi, Lysander Spooner. That's a good point you raise concerning Caesar being worshipped as a diety. After I first published this article, others brought up that point to me, as well. Although even without this point, the arguments I do present regarding Jesus vis-à-vis the ethical status of taxes and government are already irrefragable. You should definitely transcribe Geoffrey Stewart's article, or make scans of it available on the internet. Is he still alive? Regarding your statements on "statist-Christian horrors" and "crimes-of-the-Christians," one point that I've repeatedly made in my writings is that being a Christian requires following the Command of Jesus Christ (of which He gave various formulation for, all of which logically reduce back to the same principle). Jesus said that He *is* the Truth, and that no one comes to the Father except through Him, i.e., except by following *the truth*: the sine qua non of which being how we treat and regard others. We are to worship Jesus by following His one and only Commandment: what we commonly call today the Golden Rule. All who follow this Commandment of His are in fact Christians, whether they have ever heard of the name Jesus or not. The only sin that has ever existed or could ever exist is violation of this Commandment. All those who violate this Commandment are not and cannot be Christians until they repent of their sins (again, of which is violation of this Commandment, in either mind or deed) and follow this Commandment. As Alex Jones has astutely said on a number of occations, if you want to find Satan, go to a typical "Christian" church. For example, the Roman Catholic Church is simply the Roman government gone underground. Hence the reason for all the pagan holidays that people practice as being "Christian." (In fact, there is no such thing as a Christian holiday--all the supposed holidays that people think are "Christian" are in fact pagan, whether it be Easter, Christmas, Sunday as the rest-day, or any other supposed "Christian" holiday.) Even with the Protestant churches, they mostly act as handmaidens of government. When the Antichrist comes, most who call themselves "Christians" will gladly worship him as being the Second Coming of Jesus Christ, unless there is a mass-awakening in the interim. It is Satanism that is quite literally the religion of the ruling elite, and the religion of the highest levels of Freemasonry. Although most Freemasons are simply dues-paying dupes who don't know that Freemasonry the highest levels is Lucifer-worship. But the ruling elites falsely label themselves in order to gain the masses' acquiescence, and in order to further warp the masses. ------- "Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism," September 30, 2005: <a href="http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth">www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth</a> "Jesus Is an Anarchist," James Redford, revised and expanded edition, June 1, 2006 (originally published on December 19, 2001): <a href="http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf">praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf</a>

by **Lysander Spooner** » Mon Oct 30, 2006 5:45 pm

Your bringing up the "anti-Christ" reminds me of nother insight I found in Geoffrey Stewart's essay "Jesus as Anarchist Tax-Resistor" that I've never forgotten. Stewart said that Jesus the Anarchist Tax Resistor would NEVER have called himself "Christ" which means "annoited King" which is a political rank. Hence, Stewart said that Jesus was actually an anti-Christ himself. So, for the past 25 years or so, I've usually made sure never to call my self a "Christian" and instead have always described myself as a "follower of Jesus." Beginning about 10 or 15 years ago I started doing research into the historical Jesus, and have since come to the conclusion that Jesus of Nazareth probably never existed (see <a href="http://www.jesusneverexisted.com">www.jesusneverexisted.com</a> ). But, for the most part I still believe that the principles found in the stories of Jesus in gospels such as the Jeffersonian Bible are solid anarchist words to live by.

by **James Redford** » Tue Oct 31, 2006 3:07 pm

Lysander Spooner, I hope that you will at least get scans of Geoffrey Stewart's article online. That shouldn't take much effort if you have a scanner. And actually, Lysander Spooner, the word "christ" simply means "anointed" or "the anointed one." But I don't have a problem regarding Jesus Christ as the King. My article "Jesus Is an Anarchist" elaborates on the fundamental differences of the Kindom of God as opposed to Earthly, mortal kingdoms. The Kingdom of God won't actually be a government in the sense of a coercive monopoly on ultimate control of the legal use of force--i.e., an organization which must continuously violate the Golden Rule--but will be in accordance with the Golden Rule. As well, the prophets and the New Testament speak about what the meaning of the establishment of Heaven on Earth is to be: all the truth-seekers shall be made kings upon the Earth, i.e., kings over their own domain, i.e., self-rulers. Regarding the actual existence on Earth of the person known as Jesus Christ, the historicity of Jesus Christ has never been much in doubt by scholars (including non-Christians) other than with recent atheists with a skewed philosophical bone to pick and who don't hesitate to make fools out of themselves in the process. This modern charge of the non-historicity of Jesus is grounded on an a priori philosophical assumption--i.e., that an actual personage such as Jesus is impossible, therefore any historical evidence which confirms His place in actual history is *by definition* untrue. But these same people are quite reluctant to actually flesh-out the necessary implications of this position (since doing so would reveal the absurdity of this position). Namely, that a massive conspiracy was instituted by (presumably) a break-away sect of Jews in an apparent effort to get themselves tortured and murdered by their fellow Jews and by the Roman government, willingly martyring themselves for a personage whom they knew to be a fictional creation of their own invention. After all, it would be a number of centuries before people claiming the mantle of Christianity would actually come into power; the originators of this conspiracy had only to look forward to a life of suffering and being marginalized as (1) a heretical sect by the Jews (punishable by death, such as by stoning), and (2) a popular scapegoat by the Roman government (with such niceties awaiting as being fed to lions, burned alive as living torches, crucifixion, etc.). And moreover, that this conspiracy could somehow overtake the Western world without leaving the slightest historical trace of its mechinations in inventing a fictional character which it represented as a historical person--that this somehow all managed to occur without the early Christian-conspirators' many violently hostile enemies ever bothering to make note of the Christian-conspirators' invented fiction. The following are some first century non-Christian sources which corroborate the historicity of Jesus Christ: Josephus, the Talmud, Thallus, Mara Bar-Serapion, etc. Jesus lived His public life in the land of Palestine under the Roman rule of Tiberius (A.D. 14-37). There are *three possible* Roman historical sources for Tiberius's reign written prior to A.D. 200: Tacitus (A.D. 55-117), Suetonius (A.D. 70-160), and Velleius Paterculus (a contemporary). There are two Jewish historical resources that describe events of this period: Josephus (A.D. 37-c. 100), writing in Greek, and the Rabbinical writings (compilation of the Talmud started c. A.D. 70 from the oral form prior to that time). Of these writings, we would *not* expect Velleius to have a reference to Jesus (i.e., the events were happening outside of Velleius's home area during his life; Velleius [c. 19 B.C.-c. A.D. 31] was a contemporary of Jesus who likely died before Jesus's crucifixion). Of the remaining Roman historians--Tacitus and Suetonius--we have references to Jesus. Thus, we have an amazing fact: *all* the relevant non-Jewish historical sources mention Jesus! (Notice that this is the *opposite* situation than is commonly assumed: "If Jesus was so important, why didn't more historians write about Him?" In this case, *they all did!*) Of the Jewish resources--Josephus and the Rabbinical writings (i.e., the Talmud, and the Midrash)--both make clear references to the existence of Jesus. So *all* the Jewish historical sources refer to Jesus Christ. The above three paragraphs only concern the standard Roman histories of Tiberius's reign and the standard Jewish historical sources written prior to A.D. 200. Other non-Christian historical sources writing prior to A.D. 200 which independently confirm the Gospels include Pliny the Younger (Roman governor of Bithynia), Lucian of Samosata, the Greek historian Phlegon, the historian Thallus, the Greek writer Celsus, Mara Bar-Serapion, etc. Most of these sources were actively hostile to Christianity. ------- "Documentation on Government-Staged Terrorism," September 30, 2005: <a href="http://www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth">www.armleg.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2&mforum=libertyandtruth</a> "Jesus Is an Anarchist," James Redford, revised and expanded edition, June 1, 2006 (originally published on December 19, 2001): <a href="http://praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf">praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf</a>

by **johnny nemo** » Thu Nov 02, 2006 8:49 pm

I can't find a link to it, but Reagan Youth, used to do a cool song called "Jesus Was A Communist". Technically, this is partially correct, as the "redistribution of wealth", i.e. from each according to his ability, to each according to his need , which Karl Marx wrote in Critique of the Gotha Program in 1875, is from the Book Of Acts, describing how the early Christians lived. All that believed were together, and had all things in common; And sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. (Acts 2:44-45) ... There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. They laid it at the apostles’ feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need. (Acts 4:34-35) So, Jesus was, depending on your viewpoint, either an anarchist of the syndicalist/collectivist variety, or a Communist. Either way, his politics were much different than the "religious right" would have you believe.

by **Lysander Spooner** » Sun Nov 05, 2006 12:08 am

Ok, I found the essay in the garage. I see that it is signed by Joffre Stewart, not "Geoffrey." And if you google for "Joffre Stewart" you can find out that he has been a semi-prominent Chicago anarchist and poet from the beat-era onward: <a href="http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Joffre-Stewart">www.nationmaster.com/ency...re-Stewart</a> <a href="http://www.usk.org/poetry/stage/stewart/stewart.html">www.usk.org/poetry/stage/...ewart.html</a> I don't see his Jesus-piece posted anywhere so because I'm such a nice guy I typed up his 8 page intricately and beautifically hand-scripted essay below. I tried as best as possible to preserve all of the original capitalization, underlines, italics (script in the original), punctuation, etc: JESUS AS AN An-ARCHIST TAX-RESISTER PREFATORY NOTE The material below formed the basis for discussion in a workshop of a DON'T-PAY-TAX conference sponsored by CHICAGO AREA WAR RESISTERS SUPPORT GROUP, and held at the Wellington Ave United Church of Christ, 615 Wellington, CHICAGO, IL (SAT 12 FEB 83). It resulted in a consensus that the historical Jesus was indeed one of us tax-resisters. 1 "An-ARCHIST" was supposed to be in the description of this workshop. The fact that it is not, says something about what we are up against. Note that in the tax-refusal brochure composed by the CHICAGO AREA WAR RESISTERS SUPPORT GROUP* the historical Jesus is not listed among tax-resisters. If this workshop is successful, it will be able to recommend that the historical Jesus, the an-archist, be included in any listing of tax-resisters. And we may as well benefit from this fact about Jesus. 2 First, what anarchism is not. In this regard, people coming into the workshop late may bring their misunderstandings with them. It is up to you to see that they do not destroy the usefulness of this gathering by boring you with misunderstandings that we have done away with. Second, what an-archism is. Finally, how Jesus fits in under the correct definition of an-archism, as a tax-refuser, of course. 3 An-archism is not what (Webster's and) the newsmedia assume it is: It is not chaos, disporder, violence, terrorism, bomb-making. For what an-archism is, let's go to an an-archist, not a newshack. George Woodcock, an an-archist, writes the Encyclopedia Brittanica entry for an-archism, which begins: "Anarchism is a term describing a cluster of doctrines and attitudes whose principle uniting feature is that government is both harmful and unnecessary." p. 808; 1974 From that I emfasize: GOVERNMENT IS BOTH HARMFUL AND UNNECESSARY. and here is my own definition: An-archism is nonviolent revolution against Authority such as would yield a STATE-LESS, classless, non-chauvinist society on a basis of: FREE LOVE My definition is larger than Woodcock's minimal definition but it includes the essential of that definition. Also, by negating Authority, my defintion intersects Jesus' definition for his an-archism, particularly where we find it in Mark 10:42-43: 42 But Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them Ye know that they who are accounted to rule over the Gentiles, exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them 43 But so shall it not be among you; (Scofield-KJV) Jesus negates Rule, Lordship (a word for which americans might substitute "domination") and Authority. Authority means Command-Obedience. Thus Jesus wiped out Government and wiped out everything from which you might make any kind of Government whatever: democracy, dictatorship, despotism, republic, socialism, theocracy, aristocracy; the Marxist, Zionist, Vatican, Puritan, Islamic, Fidelista: you name it. Jesus would NOT tell you to vote. NO COPS NO COURTS NO JAILS NO TAXES. Consequently, Jesus had to be opposed to taxes, opposed to the assessment or collection of any tax whatsoever. Jesus was an an-archist tax-resister. And Jesus was an an-archist tax-resister because he was not a hypocrite. He was not a wishy-washy liberal, and he was not, with all due respect to those who include an-archism in their curricula, a tenured academic revolutionary. And that does it. 4 The rest is overkill, as far as establishing Jesus as a tax-resister is concerned. There is one place in the record where Jesus actually refused to pay tax & removed all obligation to pay tax and another place where he answered that no Jew nor anyone who followed the 10 Commandments could pay tax. Jesus specifically destroys tax-collection in Matt 17:24-26: 24 And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? 25 He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou Simon? Of whom do the Kings of the earth take custom or tribute? Of their own children or of strangers? 26 Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Scofield - KJV) Note that in Jesus' time taxes were exactions imposed by a foreign power. It was unheard of that people should rob themselves. People robbing themselves is called "democracy". Therefore you may look on democracy as a form of imperialism that pervades the body social entire. Democracy is the worst form of imperialism from this point of view. What we call totalitarian societies come out of democratic antecedents or democratic theory. Since the tax was the imposition of a foreign power, tax-refusal was more than the evasion of a money charge. Tribute was a test of loyalty and refusal of tribute was revolution. Jesus obviously was a nonviolent revolutionary. Tax-refusal, now as then, is the most important avenue to nonviolent revolution. It is not strictly an individual or personal matter, it is a matter of fundamental social change. The Temple tax (the particular tax in question) was not a Jewish tax but a Roman imposition. When the Romans tore down the Temple, the tax did not end: the tribute flowed to the Roman temple of Jupiter Capitolanus. Establishment Christianity, that which put this roof over our heads, exists by keeping people from knowing Jesus as Jesus knew himself. They do this by being ridiculous. Believing in miracles is one way to be ridiculous. Matt 17:27 is ridiculous, therefore they tell you that it means pay taxes. The Jesus of Establishment Christianity MUST BE A HYPOCRITE. Matt 17:27 reads: 27 Notwithstandnig, lest we offend them, go thou to the sea, and cast an hook, and take up the fish, that first cometh up. And when thou hast opened its mouth, thou shalt find a piece of money; that take and give unto them for me and thee. (Scofield - KJV) Nowhere does it say that Peter followed that ridiculous advice and paid taxes. But Establishment Christianity is so desparate to get taxes paid that it has Peter doing the impossible. I don't know how to account for the language of Matt 17:27. If it is not a mistranslation or an editorial fraud then it could very easily be some Jewish joke, the meaning of which is lost the same way jokes in Shakespeare no longer have meaning. I myself am disinclined to attempt jokes because they are so often taken seriously and badly received. Christianity in a sense may be based on Jewish jokes. Jacques Ellul is an an-archist theologian who sees Matt 17:27 as not referring to any actual event, like tax-paying. He writes: "Jesus' attitude on political authority in the Gospels is a radically negative one. He himself refuses to exercise a juridical type of authority. He counsels his disciples not to imitate the kings of nations ("Kings and governors have dominion over men; let there be none like that among you..."). He refuses to become king or to participate in the political conflicts of his time It is very significant in this regard, that there were both Roman 'collaborators' (Matthew) and Zealots, the violent anti-Roman patriots (Judas, Simon) among his disciples. He knew quite well the resistance party and refused to join it. He held political authority up to derision. Consider the famous and interesting affair of the two coins found in the mouth of a fish, an occasion to talk about tax. This is the sole and unique miracle of this type, bordering on the exorbitant, done precisely to demonstrate that the duty of paying taxes is simply ridiculous. (emfasis supplied) Katallagete, Vol. 7, No. 3, p. 20, col .1. I'm an atheist: miracles don't happen. Whether you are a theologian or an atheist, Jesus did not pay tax and in Matt. 17:24-26, removed all obligation to pay tax. Matthew had been a tax-collector. When he fell in with Jesus he was no longer an agent of internal revenue. Matthew tells us what he learned. 5 Where Jesus says, "Render unto Caesar..." etc., Jesus is saying: DON'T PAY TAX. Establishment Christianity tells you the opposite. Establishment Christianity must and does falsify the historical situation, falsifies religion itself, in order to have Jesus contradicting his an-archism. Let's take it from Luke 20:20-26. It was a question of law. A question of Jewish law, not Roman law which was alien and had no standing (or respect). In the New English Bible, the passage reads: "So they [the lawyers and chief priests] watched their opportunity and sent secret agents in the guise of honest men to seize upon some word of his as a pretext for handing him over to the authority and jurisdiction of the Governor. They put a question to him: 'Master,' they said, 'we know that what you speak and teach is sound; you pay deference to no one, but teach in all honesty the way of life that God requires. Are we or are we not permitted to pay taxes to the Roman Emperor?' He saw through their trick and said, 'Show me a silver piece. Whose head does it bear and whose inscription?' 'Caesar's' they replied. 'Very well then' he said, 'pay Caesar what is due to Caesar and pay God what is due to God. Thus their attempt to catch him out in public failed, and astonished by his reply, they fell silent." Note first that the person who asked the question recognized that Jesus was of such independent character that he would not be expected to show the subservience that comes with rendering tribute. "You pay deference to no one...". Note next the coin. The coin was a direct violation of the 1st & 2nd Commandments. The coin designated Caesar as a divinity. The Jews to whom Jesus spoke knew how to differentiate God from Caesar.** The theologians who tell you Jesus was saying pay tax don't even know the 1st Commandment. Note that the image of Caesar is on the coin. The 2nd Commandment forbids graven images. In other words the person who handed Jesus a coin, convicted himself. There was an absolute conflict between rendering unto g-d and rendering unto Caesar. Only a hypocrite man might attempt both. That was the person who handed Jesus a coin. Caesar had nothing coming except the effort it took to kick him out of Palestine: The only thing you owe Caesar is revolution, overthrow, desctruction. And note: those who heard Jesus could not say that he had said pay taxes. Only someone who has been to divinity school can tell you that. And when Jesus came to trial before Pilate, he was charged with encouraging nonpayment of taxes and the charge was correct. Futher note: in later years of the empire, the Romans met the Jewish objection to graven images by taking their mugs of coins. Now the answer Jesus gave in Luke 20:20-26 was given to get a stool pigeon off his back. All it means is that Jesus had more than one way to say: DON'T PAY TAXES. Jesus' fundamental objection to taxes is the nonviolent one that The State has no right to exist. 6 A final word: if you understand Jesus correctly as an an-archist tax-resister, then you never ever refer to him as "Christ". The Jews were looking for a sanctified politico-military leader of armed struggle to oust the Romans. Somebody like Ariel Sharon. The Jews wanted to be the little Caesars that they were before the Romans. They wanted to be what Zionists are now. Because Jesus was nonviolent, he told them again and again that he was not "the Christ": John 6:15, Luke 17:20-21, Mark 10:35-43, etc. When he stood before Pilate, Pilate asked: Are you king of the Jews? In John 18:36 Jesus answered: "My kingship is not according to this world, if it were, my servants would fight.." Kings kick ass. Jesus was nonviolent therefore completely opposed to any war-making, tax-collecting thing like Caesar, boss, Khan; like King, like Rex, like Christ. In terms of the languages that were nailed overhead at the crucifixion Jesus was anti-King, anti-Rex, anti-Christ. Jesus ANTI-Christ. If you understand Jesus correctly, you know how (to) call him ANTI-Christ, never Christ. You know a "Christ" by the draft s/he imposes and the taxes s/he collects. It follows that in our report and recommendations to the plenum, if we recommend that Jesus be included as an historic DOWN-WITH-THE-STATE tax-resister, then we do not refer to Jesus as "Christ", a term Jesus not only avoided, but destroyed in Luke 17:20-21, where his teaching takes on the meaning of FREEDOM NOW. Somewhere in John, Jesus says: I call you not servants, but friends. It is Quaker practice not to refer to anyone by title, not even "Mr". Let's all be advocates of the ANTI-Christ, let's all be friends. Joffre Stewart, advocate of the ANTI-Christ, 6238 S. Aberdeen, CHICAGO, IL 6062x *"A CALL TO WAR TAX RESISTANCE/the choice is ours". 1982 **Rendering tribute to Caesar meant giving loyalty to an alien divinity, in contravention of the first principle of monotheist faith.

Regarding: praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

Regarding: praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

Re: Regarding: praxeology.net/anarchist-jesus.pdf

Re: Jesus Anti-Christ

Re: Jesus Anti-Christ

Jesus was a Communist

Re: Jesus As an Anarchist Tax-Resister

Who is online