• abraxas@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    9 months ago

    The biggest lie the Religious Right repeats is by rejecting that Jesus would be a progressive.

    Jesus (at least as depicted by the Bible) advocated nothing about hurting people who were different, and preached tolerance throughout his life.

    • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      9 months ago

      No. That is you picking and choosing verses. Which I can do as well.

      He was quite clear that his way was the only way to heaven and what’s more just saying you followed him wasn’t enough. You can’t be tolerant of other views when you are telling people that the holders of other views are going to burn in hell and even those who agree with you might still not measure up.

      He was quite clear that you couldn’t follow him and have a good relationship with people who didn’t. That outsiders would hate you and you would hate them. That the very family unit was a snare to keep you away from him. Again this is a hurtful non-tolerant view.

      Then he told his followers of the time of his wrath was coming where he would torture those who opposed him and his followers would go around murdering many tossing the bodies at his feet.

      • jan teli@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        9 months ago

        He was quite clear that his way was the only way to heaven

        He said ‭‭"I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me." (John‬ ‭14:6)

        and what’s more just saying you followed him wasn’t enough

        This is what the parable of the sheep and the goats(what the original post was based on) is about.

        You can’t be tolerant of other views when you are telling people that the holders of other views are going to burn in hell

        Hell isn’t a place where people are eternally tortured by Satan-- it’s an event, it hasn’t happened yet, and it’ll be originally prepared for Satan and the demons. The idea of humans having immortal souls comes from greek philosophy and is not Biblical. Any humans that go to hell (the lake of fire) will die (I’m not quite sure about the Demons, I’ll have to do more research). Heaven isn’t just about living forever, it’s also about being with God forever, and if you want to be with Him forever, why wouldn’t you eant to be with Him now? I think the lake of fire (I’m calling it that because the word “hell” has a lot of unhelpful connotations to it) might just be the absence of God. Keep in mind that this is from Revelation which uses a lot of metaphors and prophetic imagery.

        He was quite clear that you couldn’t follow him and have a good relationship with people who didn’t.

        That’s not what He said: He said that He needs to be at the centre of our lives. That certainly doesn’t mean that we can’t have good relationships with others, both believers and non-believers. ‭"We are therefore Christ’s ambassadors, as though God were making his appeal through us. We implore you on Christ’s behalf: Be reconciled to God." (2 Corinthians‬ ‭5:20).

        That outsiders would hate you and you would hate them.

        He didn’t say that non-believers and believers should hate each other, He said that His teaching would be controversal and decisive-- “‭‭Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matthew‬ ‭10:34‬ ). Of course He will bring peace when He returns and His teachings encourage peace (although it isn’t presented as being the most important thing), but throughout history His teachings have been very controversal.

        That the very family unit was a snare to keep you away from him

        I’m not quite sure which verses you’re talking about here, but I can think of two: Matthew 10:35-36 and Luke 14:26. The first one is the continuation of when He says that He came to bring a sword and He is still talking about how His teachings would ve controversial and decisive. In the second one He doesn’t mean to literally hate, He means it comparitively. He’s talking again about how He should be at the centre of our lives and our most important thing.

        Then he told his followers of the time of his wrath was coming where he would torture those who opposed him

        I talked about this in my response to the bit about tolerance

        his followers would go around murdering many tossing the bodies at his feet.

        I don’t remember reading about this. Could you tell me where it’s found?

      • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        Most of what you’re saying don’t contradict progressivism.

        The things that do, I would say from the other reply to you are pretty controversial interpretations or contexts, or downright so mis-explained by you that people aren’t able to guess what verses you mean.

        I’m not a Christian, but I’m not going to bury my head from seeing how progressive their namesake was.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          Most of what you’re saying don’t contradict progressivism.

          How do you unify the absolute obedience to God with a secular society? How do you unify strict adherence to all the commandments with a secular government? How do you unify god ordained leadership with democracy?

          The things that do, I would say from the other reply to you are pretty controversial interpretations or contexts

          Very well. Show me what verse I am wrong about and the correct understanding. Then explain how you determined that and how you determines that Christian leaders and thinkers have been so wrong for so long about the meaning of these passages?

          I’m not a Christian, but I’m not going to bury my head from seeing how progressive their namesake was.

          Which is why he spoke out in support of the LGBT, religious tolerance, and against slavery? Oh wait, he didn’t.

          • abraxas@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            9 months ago

            How do you unify the absolute obedience to God with a secular society

            Render unto Caesar? Jesus’ preaching seems clearly to favor things like welfare and social sharing over blasphemy laws. He directly broke the religious mandates of his people in favor of helping those in need.

            Very well. Show me what verse I am wrong about and the correct understanding

            Part of my objection is that many of us couldn’t even figure out what verses you meant. Name a verse that clearly shows Jesus must support the political Right and then we can discuss it.

            Which is why he spoke out in support of the LGBT, religious tolerance, and against slavery? Oh wait, he didn’t

            It might surprise you, but Jesus didn’t live in 20th Century America. With that in mind:

            LGBT - This is literally why I argue that Christians inject anti-gay rhetoric. He DIDN’T speak out about how to treat gay people in an empire where homosexuality was largely tolerated. Short of him turning to the camera and starting to comment on video games, one wouldn’t expect him to talk about gay rights, or abortion, or any 20th century comedy.

            religious tolerance

            While he tried to convert pagans, he was accepting of them in a smaller region where they were largely outcasts. Pagan influences are a large part of why Christianity doesn’t look like Judaism-plus-plus. The Jewish people were ruled by a pagan empire, and yet again we have no speech against it.

            against slavery

            In this one you might have a point. But I think you’re stretching if looking at it as an outsider. Through all the books of progressive teaching, focusing on the fact he fails to take the time to condemn slavery seems like you’re showing your hand if it’s your reason for rejecting his general progressivism.

            Unlike Christians, I don’t think Jesus was perfect. I’m convinced if he were alive running for office, he’d be Far Left.