GullahGullahIslander
25619
835
25
Apr 10, 2026 5:21 PM
GullahGullahIslander
25619
835
25
Iblamemyparentstoo
Teledabby
if jesus came from heaven .... of sacrificing himself, then judas was not as bad as he is portrayed by church ashe just helped jesus to end on said cross?
kimwimgoddess
Correct
OgreMkV
On the other hand, one interpretation of Matthew 5:17 is that the old laws still apply. Jesus was fulfillment of the prophecies.... not the elimination of the Law.
Again, we have contradictions in the Bible and people just taking the bits and pieces that they want to.
ajhorselady84
So this is wrong in a few ways. The concept of original sin and needing atonement for it is not a part of the Jewish tradition. It was added to Christianity a few hundred years after Jesus as an interpretation of inherited sin which is a concept that does appear in the Jewish faith. They weren't worried about trying to get into heaven because all souls went back to God after death regardless of how they lived. They did not have a concept of a hell that bad people go to for eternity
curialis
Well, Leviticus is the 3rd book in the bible and the new testament doesn't show up until after the 39th book, so I propose most people know the ending but have never read all the way there
StarscreamAndHutch
Worst book club ever
Subtilico
I was thought Jesus said on the cross: 'Eli Eli, lama sabachtani' Which is Aramaic for: My Lord my Lord, why have you forsaken me?
ButImNoExpert
Only in two of the four gospels. He's supposedly quoting David's opening lament from Psalm 22, to help paint a picture that this crucifixion scene echoes that of Psalm 22. A bit of forced perspective, if you will.
thrael
but without the fear of the old testament god to use as a cudgel, how will power-hungry men control the populace through religion?
GravyEducation
Capitalism?
Zyrixion
Good news, they're one and the same! Capitalism is what we got when christian social ideology mixed with economics!
TinyBadger101
New Testament God is way worse. OT god just kills you. NT version tortures you for eternity. As a mechanism for control, NT god is significantly more effective even if both work.
UnluckyLunkhead
People are happy to quote Lev when it helps them hate others, but ignore the same book when it comes to eating crab & lobster, having unkempt hair, going to church within 33 days of giving birth to a boy (66 days for a girl), mixing fabrics in clothing, getting tattoos...
jayman0123
imgurianitarian
Rhythmaster
All religious people cherry pick from their holy books. They care about some of it, and ignore some of it. Its impossible to do anything else because we live in modern times and these books were written in a different era and a different culture. To me that kinda shows that just like atheists, their morals and ideas come from their cultural upbringing, (ie. The people around them) not the faith or the scriptures...
RobertAG25772
Amen
ropetopus
I don’t have a problem with treating religious texts as things to be interpreted, even if that leads to some cherry-picking. I *do* have a problem with hypocritical interpretations that exist only to serve selfish goals.
If you’re not trying to understand your holy book with the intent of figuring out how to be a good person, fuck you, basically.
Rhythmaster
Of course it requires interpretation. That's what drives me nuts when religious people claim it needs no interpretation, god's word is clear, eternal and unchanging and that they fully obey 100% of it because they're good Christians. It's impossible for that to be the case.
Misora
oh nice I'm 1000 days without going to church after the birth of my son. Good to know I'm batting high in something for a change!
GreenJayBird
1500 and counting!
invisiblemaniac
circlebreaker
invisiblemaniac
Comet260
They need cross necklaces too.
Apeofdeath
Sin so Jesus's sacrifice means something
afmgreentea
I mean, Paul definitely says to NOT do that, but if you're only being a non-shitty person because the Apostle Paul clarified what "grace" meant, you have bigger issues
icouldntthinkofabetterusername2
That’s the thing, there are thousands of denominations of Christianity, they can’t agree on what the inerrant word of god even says or really means. Let it go and let people live as they choose to live (obvious clauses of harm and consent etc.).
bittenicht39
Muslims (Sunni/Shiite/,…) and Jews (Orthodox/Reconstructionist/….) also have very different interpretations of their faith. I guess many other religions as well. Sometimes even enough differences to kill their fellow siblings in faith, just like Christians did for a very long time (from Martin Luther to "The Troubles“ in Northern Ireland, maybe longer).
GravyEducation
Zackly. Freedom of religion. Believe what you wanna believe. You're fuckin wrong if you believe in a God. But believe what helps you in life, I would never deny that comfort to a person
dashers
_most_ differ on dogma, not the fundamentals. The how they want to do their religious ceremonies etc, not who and what is God.
ButImNoExpert
There are Christian churches that work to embrace the LBGTQ community, and Christian churches that work to demonise and villify the LBGTQ community, just as one example.
That is fundamental, not dogma, and that same sort of difference can be extended to a considerable number of similar issues.
nothingunused
IF people were capable of keeping their personal beliefs _personal_, sure. But it seems an awful lot of them think everyone should have to believe them, too.
icouldntthinkofabetterusername2
Yeah that was what I was going for. A suggestion for everyone including Christians to let it go and let others live, not that we should let some Christians be bigoted assholes because of how they interpret their favourite scriptures.
Donfolstar
In my church going youth it was frustrating that """Christians""" around me knew nothing about Christianity. Imagine someone was a diehard Star Wars fan. They wore Star Wars swag every day. Associated with other fans. Went once a week to listen to some dude sort of talk about Star Wars but mostly about politics thinly veiled. Sometimes they would get into arguments with people for not liking Star Wars. Then one day you say "I sure like Vader" and they respond "who?". That's modern Christianity.
Starfox5
The bible condones slavery (It has rules for it but doesn't ban it). That automatically disqualifies the book as a source of moral guidance.
unfortunatelynotdeadyet
Who gives a shit what some goat herders from 2000 years ago, who almost certainly never met Jesus, have to say about anything.
GoddessPurpleFrost
There is no way that goat FUCKERS from 2000 years ago knew more about the universe than we do today. I am being overly dramatic, but fuck every single person who perpetuates religion and its spread on humanity. We have literal AI algorithms that can talk almost as well as a human and people still believe a burning bush is talking to them because they ate the wrong type of mushroom. Fuck i hate it here.
Margrave9000
Yup.
Their SCIENCE&TECH is inferior to ours. Their words are worthless to us.
CommodusLeitdorf
Because too many people follow this old book because we humans have this flaw where we treat anything that is old as a sign of having authority.
VanJackBurace
I mean
"There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses." Ezekiel 23:20
I care deeply about what they have to say about that.
LifeWouldBeEasyIfIWereEasyButLifeIsHardAndSoAmI
They would deeply implant you and call it a Donkey Show
SofaH3ro
The 4 main gospels of the new testament were written 50-110 years after death, so they definitely did not meet him.
dashers
They are though thought to be written by people who spoke to the disciples and witnesses. Jesus was very much living memory in a society that was very good with it's oral tradition.
ButImNoExpert
No, two of them are though to be copies of Mark, with some unique artistic flair added to each, and the fourth is just way off. They don't agree with one another, and get things wrong throughout.
SofaH3ro
It's largely believed they used similar sources. Mark was first, Matthew and Luke may have discovered additional sources, but John is last, and farthest chronologically from Jesus' death. John is, as you said, a bit different.
Wolfshead009
And that is the 4 they picked, not including the over 40 others floating around out there.
bittenicht39
Every text in the bible has been written down, translated, modified, selected by comittees, etc. With rinse and repeat so often that virtually nothing in there has any relation to the time the original events happened or were imagined at all.
dashers
Many modern translations are authored from the oldest copies of manuscripts available. New Testament (Jesus) being very reliable. Old testament stuff being more prone to being told before being written, but also pretty consistent after being written (independent archaeological manuscripts aligning very closely).
ButImNoExpert
Not even close. No writings are within decades of the time of Jesus, and they contradict one another on key details of supposed events.
dashers
Contradict? As I understood it, the debate is mostly about which ones fed into each other, and whether there was a spoken book of Jesus' sayings that was commonly used as a reference. Mark is considered to have been written in 70 AD, forty years after and safely in living memory of Jesus' execution.
ButImNoExpert
Contradict. Directly contradict.
Maybe take a peek at some of the COPIOUS research from biblical scholars on the myriad contradictions.
"Safely in living memory" - for whom? At least four decades after the pruported events, with unknown authorship.
GratuaCuun
There's a reason 1 Timothy 6:10 is the most common misquote in the Bible
It's supposed to be 'the LOVE of money is the root of all evil' but is more commonly known with the first three words cut off
Almost like the wealthy want us to feel sorry for their suffering and saving us from all the evil money
The Bible is a collection of fairy tales that have been successfully turned into the most popular propaganda device in human history
jaijaikali
and of course god rewards the righteous with wealth because they can be trusted by it smh
TheFullLength
https://media1.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPWE1NzM3M2U1cG93cDRvdnIzbnFmeGFncGFoOWljNnBleG9mbG1udzMxczRoNXJiNCZlcD12MV9naWZzX3NlYXJjaCZjdD1n/3o6Zt0T3bDshj78TBu/200w.webp
lostinthoughts
In the german translation from Martin Luther, he mistranslated the word for "young woman" as virgin, thus starting the virgin cult for Mary
chiefrunswithscissors
We used the Bible incorrectly. It's meant to be inspiring stories that evolve and change with the times.
The book of Eli (great movie) could be actual canon if we weren't stuck in the dumb ass past
barbarian818
Thankfully, there is a horde of evangelical preachers who are doing their level best to save their flock from evil by harvesting as much of that naughty money from their parishioners as they can and then sequestering that money in private bank accounts. /s
jbrightmans
A lot of people just haven't read it. Right at the beginning, in the Garden of Eden, never says they ate an apple.
TheMightyMollusk
Even the shorter version still tells me that the people with the most money have the most evil. So, either way, eat the rich.
seehemewe
Wasn't it the Law in the OT that debts were supposed to be forgiven after 7 years? Except, in practice, there were ways to get out of it?
ChazzK
Something something, "these laws only apply to Hebrews/Israelites while dealing with their own kind," yadda yadda, "except when it matches with our modern biases, of course."
[deleted]
[deleted]
seehemewe
Yes, like the other person said, greed. Also, finding ways to ignore the laws & commandments b/c why help others?
Ivain
Greed. The common thread is greed.
Eyeetsass
Religion is human malware. It’s a parasitic infection of an idea. It’s a memetic cancer.
PicassoCT
Its culture. A operating system. And the result culture the purge of this operating system produced- was quite a massive failure. If you load a rational engineer operating system you dont get startrek, you get stalin and maos soviet cultures. Which means, utopism is not a worldview, its a diagnosis. You goto want to know about the species with all the ugly, no early outs, before you can develop something better.. and maybe we cant, maybe the retardations are loadbearing..
Eyeetsass
Religion is religion. If you have a sky friend, and he tells you what I have to do you can contracted a malicious thought virus. Mao did evil things, but a sky friend didn’t tell him to. He did them after forming a rational consensus. It was wrong, and terrible, but it was not religion. Religion is unique because you either hallucinate the irrational, or you make it up. Communism is a rational idea. Mao approached it wrong. Hope that helps.
PicassoCT
Communism is not a rational idea. The hallucinated utopia and the angelic perfect man and the devilish traitor figures holding paradise on earth back are very much religous figures. It has prophets and messianic moments for the masses.
Eyeetsass
You haven’t read the manifesto obviously. Communism is absolutely a rational atheist idea. I have no idea what you’re talking about. I don’t think you do either.
mafiacarstarter
Contagious mental illness.
Eyeetsass
Violently contagious.
mafiacarstarter
And contagiously violent.
Iamjacksunuesedtrainstation
NotSomoneElse68
Root of >much< evil
DocNitro
American Evangelical 'Christians' are more like picky jews. They put more faith into the jewish scripture than anything actually associated with Jesus.
fubizdaddie
It's a neat head cannon but it's all fiction anyway so why take it so seriously that you form a structural argument to defeat a debate opponent who merely thinks the heroes of the novel are super cool but doesn't actually understand the characters or their motivation, let alone the plot? You're arguing that James Bond and Agent M have actual emotional depth and moving back stories, to people who watch the movies for the action scenes and barely know the character names. It's insane.
GimcrackGewgaw
This is false. Here is what Jesus said about homosexuals: Love thy neighbor.
Wapusk
Show me, Chapter and Verse, where Jesus says "Hate the gays!" Can't do it? Gotta go to the Old Testament? Oh, okay then... show me, Chapter and Verse, where Jesus says bacon cheese burgers are okay.
JesaraB
The food rule there is hedging claims for in the form of a parable/metaphorical dream Acts 10:9-16 (specifically verses 3-15).
But it is not literal, and is the entirety of the source used to then extrapolate into "everything is fine because we say so" when Christianity ceased to be a sect of Judaism and became a death cult and then religion of their own.
FredGarvinMaleProstitute
Let's be honest. A single 30 something male with 12 male "friends". You do the math.
GeraldsNinjaStar
There were women with them and others.
Grumpy72
But he/they did hang out with prostitutes, so...
shank1104
But if the laws in the OT are no longer in effect then what happens with the ten commandments? How do Christians know which laws to follow?
linexnewt
So... you think Christians know what laws to follow now?
feelymcfeel
1. love god
2. love your neighbour
the god botherers don't seem to do either.
RobertAG25772
Hypocrites—they oughtta read Mathew’s text about judging
sirleoiii
So, the biblical answer appears to be, funnily enough, "it's up to the individual for most of that. Oh, and you don't get to be an asshole to someone who chooses differently than you."
There is story in the New Testament that Paul commented on where there was disagreement about whether it was okay to eat "unclean" meat. And his answer was basically "if it's important to you not to, then don't. But don't trip up your brother about it."
ropetopus
You aren’t supposed to follow the 10 commandments as laws, if you’re Christian. The only value of any of those laws to Christians is to gain an understanding of what God used to require. Same reason to understand things like the Code of Hamurabi (sp?).
GeraldsNinjaStar
Because the post itself is wrong and Christians love to cherry pick. Jesus specifically states he did NOT come to replace "the law or the prophets". The "law" includes ALL the laws of Moses, including the ten commandments. Christians in truth should behave like Jews who believe the Messiah returned. No pork, circumcision, and all that.
mrsparkle001
The Beatitudes and Matthew 5:21-48, including 5:43-44 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you,"
Most "Christians" do not follow the teachings of Jesus.
RobertAG25772
Most FUNDAMENTALIST Xians aren’t really Xians. For all their *talk* of JC, they don’t seem to follow “WWJD?”, as politician AG put it
mrsparkle001
and there are too many of them in the U.S. They've now infiltrated the highest offices in the country and are starting wars and kicking out their neighbors, often violently.
dashers
Ten Commandments were (allegedly) verbatim from God, etched into stone (twice), other stuff less reliably acquired. Jesus said Love God and your Neighbour, on these hang all the law. You have to read the law through the lens of those, if it's not lining up, it's been misunderstood. Jesus also showed that living to the letter of the law and not the spirit was a problem. Seems that Bronze Age people trying to interpret God got a few things muddled in translation.
ButImNoExpert
Jesus supposedly said a lot of contradictory things and claimed to fulfill prophecies which he clearly didn't understand nor fulfill (in many cases, the supposed prophecies he fulfilled are not prophecies at all). You are cherry picking to justify your belief.
RobertAG25772
Or in non-translation. Isaac Asimov noted how people fail to fully get the Parable of the Good Samaritan insofar as they don’t realize that Samaritans at the time were regarded by Jews as anything but “good”. The point of the parable is that ANYONE who treats you well, even someone who’s otherwise a pariah, is your neighbor.
IAmNotNSAsodonotbeparanoid
There were originally 15 commandments but Moses dropped one of the tablets and had to make shit up on the fly
RobertAG25772
Thus saith Mel Brooks
stonetemplefox05
I saw the whole thing
PlankTableGo
Who fucking even cares what he did or didn't say? Even if Jesus said all gays should be killed etc. that isn't a basis for how a society should create its laws. Holy shit this isn't complicated.
ThailandExpress
BaddyOneShoe
Matthew 17-20 blows this whole thing out of the water. The bible specifically says the OT is still in effect. Or maybe it's not... because the silly book is wildly inconsistent and unclear. You would think the omni-everything god of the universe would be a better writter.
hellothisispeggy
It accounts for that by saying he fucked it up on purpose because people were building a tower to the heavens so he split the world up into a variety of different languages so they wouldn't be able to work together but then he somehow doesn't give the slightest fuck about us going to the moon which is quite obviously higher than any tower that could possibly have been built.
GeraldsNinjaStar
Paul came in and contradicted Jesus. What you said is true. The OT laws never go away according to Jesus.
JesaraB
And Paul is covered (and warned against) under verse 19
Mahabazu
Christians don't even agree on what constitutes a Christian! But as for Me, I'm so glad god sent god to earth so god could die and pay god the blood toll god required for god to remove the curse god placed on god's creation because god neglected to grant god's creation knowledge of good and evil before god commanded god's creation not to commit evil! Amen!
jasondeslin
Same situation as what Jesus said about birth control and abortion.
Because it DID exist in Rome. And was nearly as effective as what we use now, just far more likely to have side effects, and took more knowledge and experience to get the dosage correct.
They had a daily use tea, a plan b dosage, and well as a miscarriage dose.
Jesus didn't give a fuck.
The old testament also gave instructions on how to perform abortions, as well as direct orders to do so.
Good thing christians can't read.
Dyamonde
Except Jesus also said the old law is still in effect, not one jot or tittle changed. And only in one of the four conflicting accounts does he say 'it is finished'. The Bible says whatever you want it to if you just look hard enough.
zombiejedediah
It's almost like the worldview of goat herders barely out of the bronze age isn't what you want to build a modern, enlightened, reflective, scientific society on.
[deleted]
[deleted]
GeraldsNinjaStar
You're completely out of context. "Fulfilled" in the Greek meant to make whole. Like I fulfill the water glass by pouring water to the top. The OT laws are in effect still according to Jesus. PAUL on the other hand, eliminated the law for Xtians because the Jews wouldn't follow them. Jesus didn't accomplish what the OT said the messiah should. Xtians found Jewish law oppressive, so to keep them, Paul overrode Jesus. Christians really follow Paul, not Jesus.
Bukoden
From what I recall, it is still in effect for those getting circumcised and the like (follow a part of the old law, follow all of the old law), but it is not required going forth for those that don't. The point of the sacrifice of Jesus was to take the place of the previous rituals and such, and is explicitly a new covenant being made, though some rules may be a part of both.
This is something I have by piecing together hearsay, though I know for certain "all" is incorrect (ex: sacrifices).
Bukoden
As an addendum, "the Bible says whatever you want it to if you just look hard enough" IF you ignore context. Many of the things claimed from it are not what is actually said, are about a specific situation (for a certain people or for a specific event), or, as previously mentioned, are explicitly no longer required (though yes, there are absolutely contradictions in what it says, too).
(Note that I am not offering any defense of the Bible/Christianity, or what is said by them. Just discussing.)
TunnelRat13
So someone else decided to clip the safety off my joystick trigger and *I* gotta give up bacon? Not happening. Please bury me with a generator and an AC unit, thank you.
Bukoden
I believe that was in reference to circumcision done at an older age (done by choice to the one that chose it). Choosing to follow the old law after new law has been made means you need to follow all of the old law.
Possibly a "you can't pick and choose which laws to follow" thing, though that's just an uneducated guess on my part.
dashers
Yes, but he also said the law hung on love god and your neighbour, and that the spirit of the law is more important than the letter. Cherry picking from the bible can say whatever you want, taking it as a whole gives you a consistent arc and a clearer picture of what is "right".
Simusar
There is evidence that the famous line: "a man should not lay with a man as he lays with a woman..." is a mistranslation, and versions of the passage that predate ~400AD actually translate to read "a man should not lay with a young boy/child, as he lays with a woman..." condemning not homosexuality, but pedophilia.
2074red2074
This isn't absolutely accepted by scholars. Keep in mind it does say both should be put to death, so you're arguing right now that the Bible says if a man rapes a little boy we should kill them both. I don't think that's better.
dashers
This, and in these times, it's said that abusively shagging your male slaves was a common thing, and this was a reference to that practice. i.e. sex should be with love and not aggression (or without consent). But nobody claiming being gay is anti-christian is going to be interested by context and nuance.
pilomotor
Pretty sure the virgin Mary actually being a virgin was a mistranslation, too.
Nephytis
If God was real they would have intervened by now.
dashers
Based on what?