• cygnus@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 months ago

    Wow I can’t believe someone would use religion to achieve their personal political ambitions!

  • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    You know what humanity needs? More division between moral authorities that claim to be speaking on behalf of god.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      I spoke to God and he told me to tell everyone to be nice to each other also he wants more high quality beer options for his servant, which is me.

      • friend_of_satan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Dear God, hope you get the letter and

        I pray you can make it better down here

        I don’t mean a big reduction in the price of beer

        But all the people that you made in your image

        See them starving on their feet

        'Cause they don’t get enough to eat from God

        Can’t believe in you

  • rayyy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    3 months ago

    Any religious leader who does not obey and preach Putin’s gospel gets the window treatment.

    • 42yeah@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 months ago

      “Alas, his faith wasn’t strong enough. That’s why God punished him by making him shoot himself on the back of his head.”

  • Zloubida@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    Perhaps the most troubling possibility is that Kirill’s Church, with its canny blend of politics and faith, turns out to be better adapted to survival in our century than mainstream Churches are.

    This, as a “mainstream Christian”, if that still means something today, is a question that almost keep me awake at night. Jesus preached peace and forgiveness, freedom from rules and universality of human dignity, and yet Christian nationalism is on the rise in America, Kirill is winning the Orthodox war of secession, in Europe the Catholic and Protestant reactionaries are winning traction, not to speak about Africa and Asia, … Secularism is not freedom from religion, it’s reinforcing the worse part of religion.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 months ago

      I like a challenge, so will show how you are wrong just with Matthew

      Jesus preached peace

      Matthew 10:34-36

      and forgiveness

      Matthew 8:12

      freedom from rules

      Matthew 5:18

      And universality of human dignity,

      Matthew 15:24

      Save yourself a bit of time. There was no historical Jesus. There is no God. The fictional Jesus people like has nothing to do with the fictional Jesus of the Bible. Christianity has always been a fascist faith.

      Secularism is not freedom from religion,

      No. Dentists aren’t causing teeth decay.

      • Zloubida@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        3 months ago

        Matthew 10 is not about what Jesus desired, but about the persecutions.

        Matthew 8 is a parabola, not meant to be taken literally.

        Matthew 5:18 is followed by Matthew 5:19-48 when Jesus change the law. The teaching is clear, especially when compared to the actions of Jesus: what should be followed is the spirit of the law, not its letter. And that’s valid for the letter of Jesus’ commandments themselves.

        Matthew 15:24 is followed Matthew 15:28, where he does save the Canaanite’s daughter. Jesus changes his mind in this text. You’re fond of cherry picking, aren’t you?

        There was no historical Jesus

        So you’re a science denier. I don’t know if Jesus is just a man without relationship with a God or more than that, or even if a God exists. But denying the historicity of Jesus is like saying we don’t walked on the Moon.

        Christianity has always been a fascist faith.

        Say that to MLK, William Wilberforce, Dorothy Day, or the Lübeck martyrs.

        Dentists aren’t causing teeth decay.

        This is a very bad analogy.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          Matthew 10 is not about what Jesus desired, but about the persecutions.

          Doesn’t say that. Post hoc justification on your part

          Matthew 8 is a parabola, not meant to be taken literally.

          Doesn’t say that. Post hoc justification on your part

          Matthew 5:18 is followed by Matthew 5:19-48 when Jesus change the law. The teaching is clear, especially when compared to the actions of Jesus: what should be followed is the spirit of the law, not its letter. And that’s valid for the letter of Jesus’ commandments themselves.

          No. Your Jesus is clear that the law has to be followed when it came to most things, especially the sexual laws which he said didn’t go far enough. Most likely this was an attempt by the author to undo the smack Mark has written about James. So he made Jesus take a deeds vs faith and did it with a Paul alignment, invoking sex.

          Matthew 15:24 is followed Matthew 15:28, where he does save the Canaanite’s daughter. Jesus changes his mind in this text. You’re fond of cherry picking, aren’t you?

          He saves the kid only AFTER the woman begs at his feet and calls herself a racial slur. You are found of fucking lying aren’t you?

          so you’re a science denier.

          Present your evidence.

          Say that to MLK, William Wilberforce, Dorothy Day, or the Lübeck martyrs.

          Just because a religion has a good people in it doesn’t mean the religion is good.

          This is a very bad analogy.

          So was your moon landing analogy

          • Zloubida@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            You mix up “justification” and “interpretation”. The Bible wasn’t written by a 21st century American you know… for example that Matthew 10 is about the persecutions is well known by every serious historian, but you don’t care about history. You just care about your hatred for Christianity. It’s your right, but it’s not very interesting yo discuss in these conditions.

            • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              2 months ago

              No. The passage is to be read based on what it says not based on what you decided it means 19 centuries later.

              Why can’t you produce evidence that your boy existed?

              • Zloubida@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                2 months ago

                What it says must be interpreted in the light of what historians said about the context of the writing. Jesus didn’t wrote the Gospels. Do you think you know better than historians?

                Same with Jesus? All serious historians, both religious and atheists, agree on the existence of Jesus. 19 texts from high Antiquity speak about Jesus, 9 between then weren’t written by Christians (Flavius ​​Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Lucian of Samosata, Galen, Mara bar Serapion, Celsus, and the Babylonian Talmud). If you think it’s not enough, please prove me the existence of Julius Caesar.

                If you reject the conclusions of the scientific community, you’re no better than a conspiracy theorist.

                • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  2 months ago

                  Do you think you know better than historians?

                  Argument from authority logical fallacy

                  You might be able to get a refund on whatever class you took on debate, just a fyi. In any case it isn’t even a question of what I think the context was the question is what the text actually says. If the text endorses fascism it endorses fascism. The fact that you can lie about the history and say that it was okay at the time written changes nothing. It still led to the horrors Christianity unleashed.

                  Same with Jesus? All serious historians

                  No true Scotsmen logical fallacy combined with posioning the well logical fallacy

                  both religious and atheists,

                  Not relevant. Truth is truth and doesn’t depend on personal belief.

                  . 19 texts from high Antiquity speak about Jesus,

                  Proof of attestation is proof that of attestation not proof that it is true. There have been way more than 19 Batman comics lines. That doesn’t give you Bruce Wayne.

                  , 9 between then weren’t written by Christians (Flavius ​​Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, Lucian of Samosata, Galen, Mara bar Serapion, Celsus, and the Babylonian Talmud

                  Josphius: wrote his book 4 decades after supposed events and the two passages are known frauds.

                  Tactius wrote even later and was repeating what a group called the Christus (not Christians) told him.

                  The remainder are all the same except the Talmud mentions which was 3 whole centuries later and talks about a Messiah figure of the 1st century BCE and was no doubt written in response to Christianity.

                  Not a single contemporary of Jesus recorded him. A man with a large following in an urban area, for supposedly 2.5 years, in a civilization actively documenting religions and they are all silent. And amazingly not a single secular historian notes this huge James community for 40 years.

                  you think it’s not enough, please prove me the existence of Julius Caesar.

                  Nope. You accuse Jesus of existing you prove your Messiah existed. I won’t let you shift the burden of proof. Another logical fallacy.

                  you reject the conclusions of the scientific community, you’re no better than a conspiracy theorist.

                  Science isn’t history and your personal attacks are a pointless waste of time.

                  Look, why don’t you actually read your book, learn the languages it was written in, and study this a bit instead of wasting my time and yours quoting whatever random blog you are quickly searching? I don’t believe for a second you knew who Celsius was or said and yet you feel confident enough to copy and paste him in the list. Get back to me when you are fluent in Biblical Hebrew and Konic Greek.

                  Edit: oh sorry I missed another logical fallacy you made. Argument from adverse consequence s. The whole idea that since an atheist historian says Jesus exists he Jesus must have existed. I will endeavor to be better at pointing out the flaws in your “argument” next time.