For all their “christianity”, republicans in the US are pretty hypocritical.
Jesus actually teached that everybody deserves to get fed and housed. That everybody deserves healthcare. That people should care for other people in their community. That is essentially the core principles of socialism.
Jesus was an authoritarian. He believed there should be one being with ultimate power and control who everyone else should obey unquestioningly.
He believed that this being was better than every living person. That any person who disobeyed the ruler should be tortured. That we are only alive, only well, only happy, if the ruler permits it.
If this is about hell, I don’t think Jesus believed in hell, at least not as we know it. He also did definitely teach about erasing the social hierarchy, at least among humans. So he was a theocrat, sure, but he wasn’t only a theocrat.
Matthew 25:41
“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels."
It’s part of a parable, but if we disregard parables then “jesus’ teachings” becomes a small pamphlet.
But I’d be keen to hear where jesus advocated for abolishing human hierarchy. Nothing comes to mind immediately outside Paul’s letters.
Sorry I’m late, but I don’t think Matthew 25:41 suggests Jesus believed in eternal punishment. It’s a very specific theology that we know very well today, so it’s easy to read it into the text. But that verse says that the fire is eternal, not necessarily the suffering.
It’s pretty likely that Jesus believed in the idea of the “second death”(not eternal).
“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” (Matt 10:28)
Its more likely that Jesus’s understanding of hell is far from the modern Christian theology.
Now about human hierarchy:
Off the top of my head, we have:
I’m sure I can find more when I have some time.
He was a cult leader opposing status quo in an authoritarian empire. It’s kind of a tough position, I imagine he used whatever was practical and contradicted himself a lot.
The core part of what he preached was very progressive for the time and place. Later, as it usually goes, it got coopted and lost 98% of its bite (imo)
Which part of status quo did he oppose? Personal wealth, yes, but that tends to be a common cult leader position. That followers should give everything to the cause.
Other than that Jesus commanded to render unto ceaser what belongs to ceaser.