News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
Jesus was an anti-war, anti-capitalist, inclusivity-preaching socialist who gave free healthcare to the sick and free food to the hungry. Maybe they should crack open that book they always talk about.
If "anyone can talk to god, you don't need all the ceremony" can turn into the Catholic Church et al for 1,900+ years, I don't think they're gonna read for comprehension on inclusion.
That's really close to why the Protestant Reformation happened, out of which all sorts of other lunacy has sprung. I'm not defending the Catholic Church by any means, but this particular criticism might not hit as hard as you intended it to.
You left out the apocalyptic zombie cannibal cult part.
That came later, really just all the blame on Constantine.
John the Baptist was an apocalyptic Jew. I think it was there from the beginning. The apocalyptic Jewish sects make sense when you consider that they started their religion during the tail end of The Bronze Age collapse. They had just watched all the major powers implode, and tons of knowledge went with them. Makes sense that they would think the world was about to end.
The problem is it's got a lot of convenient contradictory statements in it.
For example:
This part isn't in Marcion's version of Luke, which is probably the earliest extant version. But it is in the canonical version.
Something very convenient given it reversed the ban found across the Synoptics on carrying a purse when ministering, which necessarily prevented taking people's money.
Just a bonus that it also allowed for the church to take up swords too right around before the time they start executing people for 'heresy.'
There's plenty of problematic passages added in over the years:
So inclusive.
Why did you stop at verse 26?
Because the woman calling him master and him then giving in is irrelevant to her being called a dog compared to children beforehand.
The author of Matthew has a clear agenda, and the passage excerpt stands on its own.
You really don't think the context of the woman correcting him, Jesus accepting the response of a canaanite woman, admitting fault, thanking her for her faith, and then rewarding her doesn't change the context of "Jesus compared a woman to a dog" just a little bit?
He didn't admit fault. He said she had enough faith to justify his taking action. But nothing about his own initial answer being unjustified. You are reading that into the text when it isn't there.
Yes.... I wonder what that agenda might be, when a few chapters later, Jesus/revelation-by-spirit suddenly says that his disciples should go to the gentiles and minister to them rather than the jews, because the jews rejected him.
...Almost like there was a specific arc being set up to contrast one position with the next in a dramatic fashion.
What is up with people reading things into the text that aren't there?
Where in Matthew does Jesus have a revelation-by-spirit where he says not to minister to the Jews because they rejected him?
I don't know where he got that RATHER than the Jews from the book of Matthew, since I read that as more of an AND, but the rest is from the end of the book of Matthew.
Now please go be a teenage atheist edgelord somewhere else. We'll be here when you want to have a discussion in good faith, but for now, go sea-lion somewhere else.
Yes, at the end of Matthew is a declaration to go out to the world, but absolutely jack shit about a refusal towards the Jews, undermining the point the commentator was making about the very strong pro-Jewish attitudes in Matthew being part of a reversal arc.
As I said, they were reading things into the text that weren't there.
Lol. Last I checked this was /c/news, not /c/Christianity.
And being specific around the texts in question and the contexts they arise in isn't sealioning dude. I spent several years participating every day in /r/AcademicBiblical and just very much give a crap about accurate vs inaccurate representations of the material.
You can think you are circling the wagons to defend the scriptures, but I'm not the one in this thread misrepresenting them and the intentions of the respective authors. And while you can be free to do you, there is a certain wisdom regarding not blindly following the blind that extends to blind faith (and before you counter with doubting Thomas and the benefits of faith unseen, just know that the entire history of Thomasine Christianity and its relationship to early canonical Christianity is the topic I've spent six years studying in depth, so you will definitely get a mouthful back on that invocation and its post-30s CE historical context).
Ok? Have fun with all that