Bolsonarism has nothing to do with Jesus.

The scandal involving the jewels sent by the Saudi monarchy to the Bolsonaro family served to expose what was already known to everyone with some level of knowledge of Brazilian political reality: Bolsonarism symbolizes the most pronounced level of corruption and subservience to foreign interests that the nation has ever been subjected to throughout history.

Although it appears to be the icing on the cake, this attempt to suspiciously appropriate jewelry valued at approximately 16,5 million reais is far from representing the most scandalous, unethical, and anti-national aspect of the case in which the plot unfolds. Even less so in relation to the overall actions of the Bolsonaro government during its four years in power.

We need to remember that these precious stones appeared on the scene shortly before the Bolsonaro administration finalized the sale of a strategic Petrobras refinery to an investment fund based in the United Arab Emirates, but with a notable participation of Saudi capital. The small detail to observe in this operation is that the Landulpho Alves Refinery was valued by specialized agencies at around 4 billion dollars, and the deal was closed for only 1,65 billion.

Therefore, we are talking about an undervalued sale of approximately 2,35 billion dollars. To better understand the magnitude of the embezzlement caused to the nation, simply take these 2,35 billion, multiply them by 5 to obtain their equivalent in our national currency, and divide the result by the estimated value of the contraband destined for the Bolsonaros.

Since my purpose is not to test anyone's calculation skills, I reproduce below the calculations already performed:

2.350.000.000,00 x 5 = 11.750.000.000,00 ÷ 16.500.000,00 = 712,12

As we can see, the actual damage caused to the country by the under-invoiced delivery of the aforementioned refinery exceeds by more than 712 times the value of the jewels sent as a "gift" to the family of the ruler at that time. The measure, therefore, should be understood as far more serious and damaging to national interests than merely what is expressed in the value of what many tend to consider as clear evidence of bribery.

In light of everything that was already known and what has come to light in the last four years, Bolsonarism cannot help but be seen and considered as the most sordid and depraved political experience our country has suffered throughout history. Therefore, one would expect that very few people would now be willing to continue endorsing this far-right ideology and its leaders.

However, this is not what recent opinion polls reveal. According to the latest surveys, there are still around 35% of our population who do not show concern about the revelations involving the former president, his family members, and his direct aides. Regrettably, the most significant weight of this support comes from followers of churches that define themselves as evangelical Christian, especially those of the neo-Pentecostal line.

In truth, it was the realization of what is indicated in the previous paragraph that prompted me to make the reflections that I will now present.

First of all, I believe that no sincere follower of Jesus disagrees with the idea that Jesus himself knows best which path we should follow in the pursuit of a just and compassionate world where we can all live with dignity. However, since Jesus did not leave written texts of his own to guide us in this regard, surely the examples drawn from his life's legacy are what could serve as the most reliable documents of his life's plans for humanity.

Based on the information we have, throughout his earthly life, Jesus always defended the most humble, aiming to protect them from the harassment of the rich and wealthy. There is not a single instance in which Jesus appears aligned with the interests of the ruling classes, that is, taking the side of the oppressors. On the contrary, what is always evident is his rejection of the pretensions of selfishness and individualistic opulence present among the most fortunate.

So that there would be no doubt as to whom he intended to defend with his struggle, Jesus uttered the famous phrase: "It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God." Therefore, how can we not take this as a declared and open commitment in favor of the most needy?

Consulting all accounts relating to his life, we find that Jesus never engaged in racial, gender, or homophobic discrimination. For him, what determined the worth of a human being was the goodness of their heart and their determination to do good without selfish motivations. It is no coincidence that he tenaciously opposed those who sought to lynch Mary Magdalene based on moralistic accusations. Jesus understood this as blatant hypocrisy, typical of opportunists who like to resort to such tactics to appear as something they are not. This is very clear when he addressed Magdalene's persecutors with the words: "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."

For Jesus, a person's goodness or badness wasn't determined by their particular behavior or sexual orientation. Jesus never commented on these issues because he was convinced they had nothing to do with God's greater interests—God being kind, magnanimous, and just as He should necessarily be.

Furthermore, with his great wisdom and common sense, Jesus vigorously opposed the constant fundamentalist interpretations of the Old Testament, since he understood that, in the evolution of humankind in society, not everything mentioned there could have eternal validity in its literal sense. Therefore, when he judged it necessary to rectify what he considered outdated in the biblical writings, he did not hesitate to do so. In this respect, we can recall the vehemence with which he resisted those who wished to prevent him from performing his good deeds on the Sabbath, arguing that this prohibition was stipulated in the sacred texts. However, Jesus did not hesitate to refute that absurd fundamentalism, which only contributed to aggravating the problems of human beings, not to solving them.

Based on what I have been arguing, I am more than convinced that it is impossible to be a sincere follower of Jesus and identify with the political and social thought of Bolsonaro's movement. There is a blatant contradiction between the way Bolsonaro's movement views the world and everything we can extract from the teachings that Jesus himself dedicated to transmitting to us in all the circumstances that the narratives present as the legacy of his life.

I believe that the fact that there are well-meaning Christians who also consider themselves supporters of Bolsonaro is due to the intense and overwhelming manipulation they are subjected to by veritable gangs of opportunists and merchants of faith. These Christians are victims of the same type of manipulators that Jesus fought against in his own time. As in the past, many unsuspecting and innocent people who seek the essence of goodness and justice advocated by Jesus receive, in return, guidance that seeks to seduce them in a diametrically opposed direction. In other words, just as in the past Jesus denounced the false religious figures who amassed fortunes by deceiving the people in their faith, currently, the intellectual heirs of this immorality want to do so by appealing to the very name of Jesus. They speak of Jesus to prevent the realization of Jesus' dreams.

As striking examples of what we have just mentioned, we have the use of the infamous doctrines of "prosperity theology" and "dominion theology." In my view, these two theological approaches are true aberrations that profoundly violate the most praiseworthy aspects of Jesus's thought.

By instigating and morally supporting the frantic pursuit of accumulating material wealth individually, prosperity theology fosters selfishness and excessive ambition. Instead of promoting the spirit of collective unity, solidarity, justice, and empathy for those who suffer most, this nefarious current of thought induces its followers to worship avarice at its most absurdly high level. Contrary to what Jesus postulated, now, according to this view, it is the rich who enjoy God's natural grace. Being poor would indicate a lack of divine blessing. How can we accept that Jesus' teachings are so vilely adulterated?

It is undeniable that Jesus always fought against poverty, but he never fought against the poor. His aspiration was that the humble majority would become aware that material and spiritual wealth would only have meaning in a collective effort that would benefit the community as a whole, but always prioritizing the elimination of the most glaring injustices. The obsession with individual wealth bears no relation to the ideals of Jesus, who was always resolutely against selfishness.

In turn, proponents of the bellicose "dominion theology" attempt to invert the meaning of Jesus' figure. Instead of a tireless fighter for peace, who was eternally striving to create bonds of solidarity among as many people as possible, the theorists of this theology strive to forge and magnify a supreme enemy, one against whom anything is permissible. It is for this reason that, in churches that adhere to this theory, the figure of the devil receives far more emphasis than that of Jesus. The central focus becomes defeating the devil and all those who can be associated with him. Little importance is given to the goals set by Jesus and to the people who pursue them.

What is known is that, in this way, the use of hatred as the main motivator of social actions has been highlighted. There is an attempt to associate everything, or everyone, that one intends to eliminate with the devil. Therefore, to end the competition exerted on the popular masses by religions of African origin, a brutal and gigantic campaign of demonization of everything and everyone who has any cultural connection with Africanity has been carried out. It makes no difference what the objectives and desires of the Afro-Brazilian deities are; they are all equated with demons. And, as the adherents of dominion theology say, the fight must be relentless, until the total extermination of the enemy.

I have no doubt that, were Jesus personally here at this moment, he would be outraged by the wickedness and racism embedded in this destructive ideology. It is only functional for those who believe that hatred, war, and intolerance are the objectives that should prevail in relationships between people and nations with cultural differences. In other words, dominion theology has no affinity whatsoever with the ideals proposed and defended by Jesus.

We know that almost all, if not all, churches in Brazil that adhere to these recently discussed theologies are also the largest suppliers of supporters of political Bolsonaro. And this is understandable, because, as we have shown, Bolsonaroism synthesizes the essence of the distortion of Jesus' legacy in its application to political activities in its institutional sense.

I believe that the examples given by Jesus are useful and can be applied by all of humanity, regardless of their religious affiliation. But, for those who accept Jesus also as the personification of God himself, this possibility becomes a moral obligation. After all, if Jesus said, "You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free," and at the same time presented himself as the way of truth and life, it would be unacceptable to refute the truth of Jesus and the path he indicated.

To sum it all up in a few words, it is logically impossible to simultaneously support Jesus and Bolsonaro's ideology. One necessarily excludes the other.