377
u/BellyDancerEm 19d ago
More accurately it is not Christian to dislike any race of people, or religion, or sexuality, or gender identity,
129
u/BoredMan29 19d ago
Pretty sure I remember the J-man saying something about loving your neighbor but I was trying to get a camel through the eye of a needle at the time.
73
19d ago
[deleted]
46
0
u/ConcentrateTight4108 10d ago
I'm sorry to say it but you are a certified cuck, I wish it wasn't true but it is
You are cucking yourself from befriending 32% of the worlds population
23
u/LineOfInquiry 19d ago
No it’s pretty Christian to dislike people because of religion, sexuality, and gender actually. Just read the Bible, it says all those horrible things and more. The only reason it’s not racist too is because race didn’t exist when it was written.
48
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
Nah, God did a lot of fucked up shit, but Jesus definitely denounced all that "hate everyone not like you" bs
57
u/Azair_Blaidd 19d ago
But then Paul comes along and contradicts half the shit Jesus said and "Christians" decided to follow Paul over Jesus
26
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
Bingo!
It doesn't help that a lot of the messages were lost or changed due to the many translations made over the years.
2
u/alicecadabra 13d ago
I have been saying this FOR AGES. When did misogynistic Paul take precedence over JESUS?!?! It boggles the mind.
10
u/LineOfInquiry 19d ago
No he didn’t. He was totally fine with slavery, and his biggest followers were all openly homophobic. He may have had an egalitarian message when it comes to gender because of some versions of Paul’s letters, but it’s still debated if the egalitarian ones were the original ones or the changed ones. I lean more towards them being the originals, but even then women still had to follow all the Old Testament laws: even according to Jesus.
29
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago edited 19d ago
He was totally fine with slavery, and his biggest followers were all openly homophobic.
Its a common misconception due to how slave/servant was translated. But he definitely wasn't pro-slavery. His teachings may not have been explicitly anti-slavery, but nothing he said implied that he was perfectly fine with it either.
Jesus definitely wasn’t homophobic.
He may have had an egalitarian message when it comes to gender because of some versions of Paul’s letters, but it’s still debated if the egalitarian ones were the original ones or the changed ones.
You're talking about Paul, not Jesus. I feel it's important to remember that the New Testament was written by others and that Jesus wasn't even there for much of it. I can understand why you may come to the conclusion that Christianity promotes homophobia, but Jesus was pretty explicit about not being hateful. His disciples having different opinions is a big flaw in the whole religion, though. Big reason why I couldn't stick with that bs.
Edit: typos and clarifications
9
u/SitueradKunskap 19d ago
I feel it's important to remember that much of the new testament was written by other people, not Jesus.
Which parts are written by Jesus? I didn't think there were any.
15
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
True, he didn't write any of it. I was trying to say that for much of the New Testament, Jesus was already gone and not physically there telling them what to write.
Idk why I phrased it like that, my bad.
3
u/northrupthebandgeek 18d ago
Pretty sure for all of the New Testament Jesus was already gone and not physically there telling the authors what to write, considering that the absolute oldest book (Galatians) was likely written a decade or so after the crucifixion/resurrection/ascent.
3
-13
u/LineOfInquiry 19d ago
Paul was Jesus’ most important disciple and if you’re Christian you believe that Jesus directly talked to him several times through visions and picked him to deliver his message along with the apostles. Do you think Jesus would’ve picked a homophobe if he thought being pro-lgbt was important? Remember, at this time gay people, at least gay men, were a normal part of society: he could’ve spread his message and not have been anti-gay.
Paul, Peter, John, and his various disciples were handpicked to spread his message, I think any of their views are very likely to have been what Jesus believed too or else he’d have picked someone else.
13
u/77jklm 18d ago
Paul wasn't Jesus' "most important disciple". Paul never even met Jesus, and spent most of his life killing Jesus' followers. If you deny that sentence, you deny both the words of the Bible and the history of the church.
Then, after his "miraculous conversion" on the Road to Damascus, he suddenly became one of three de facto leaders of the church?! How? Why? It makes no sense! Dude was clearly a grifter and decided if he can't destroy them from the outside, he'd destroy them from the inside AND IT WORKED! And for all of history ever since then, the church has constantly been fighting about what books belong in the Bible and about how to interpret the ones that they agree on, so for me to deny that Paul ever talked to Jesus (whom he never met) shouldn't be controversial, and yet here we are.
Paul is the essence of everything that's wrong with Christianity. He taught some good things, he taught some bad things, and regardless of either of those, he DID horrible things that should've precluded him from being in the position he ended up in, but because he DID end up in that position, murderers, child molesters, and other terrible people can claim that God saved them, that they're now good godly people, and next thing you know they're in positions of power that allow them to abuse people with no repercussions. That is the legacy of Paul.
I'm not claiming that there's no repentance and salvation, I'm just saying that Christians have historically been bad judges of character and just accept people's word that they've changed, and then cover up for those people when they prove they haven't, rather than admitting they made a mistake.
The single biggest cause of atheism is Christians. I could continue the quote, but don't need to. A true statement is a true statement.
-3
u/LineOfInquiry 18d ago
By “Jesus’ most important discipline” I meant that he had the biggest impact on Christian history out of all the disciples not that he was Jesus’ favorite (that would be Peter). Sorry for the confusion.
And hey if you don’t like Paul and his message then more power to you, but most Christians don’t think that way unfortunately. :/
5
u/inmyrhyme 18d ago
The disciples are those who followed Jesus in his life like the apostles. Paul was not a disciple. He was just the best conman involved.
0
u/LineOfInquiry 18d ago
Disciples are anyone who follows the teachings of Jesus. His apostles were the 12 closest to him but everyone else were his disciples, including Christians today. At least that’s what I was taught growing up
12
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
Again, I don't believe in any of that anymore. For all of what you said to be true, it would mean Jesus ACTUALLY spoke to him in visions. But since I think that's likely untrue, it could easily be that the disciples said those things to help keep up the facade and just wrote what they wanted.
It's possible a man who was trusting and loving like Jesus could be convinced that his followers were taught well only for them to insert their own opinions into writings after his death.
Also, I feel like Jesus would have spoken up about his "homophobic beliefs" during his life time, but maybe that's just me.
1
u/LineOfInquiry 19d ago
Well if you don’t think Paul should count as a real source for Jesus’ wisdom that’s fine but most Christians don’t share that view.
You don’t think Jesus at least once would come back down and be like “hey, you guys are misinterpreting me maybe don’t murder gay people?”. I mean, he cared about the lives of queer people right? Just give someone important a vision
10
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
Well if you don’t think Paul should count as a real source for Jesus’ wisdom that’s fine but most Christians don’t share that view.
I know. Again, there's a reason I lost my faith.
You don’t think Jesus at least once would come back down and be like “hey, you guys are misinterpreting me maybe don’t murder gay people?”. I mean, he cared about the lives of queer people right? Just give someone important a vision
Again, you're operating under the assumption that he was actually the son of God, that God is real, and that Jesus actually had the ability to do that after his death. At this point, you're clearly just upset with the disciples, not Jesus.
7
u/LineOfInquiry 19d ago
I realize I’m taking that position, because I’m trying to argue with christians on their own ground: ie that Jesus is the son of god. Ultimately the point I wanted to make is that it’s irrelevant what Jesus said or believed because being queer is fine regardless. I didn’t realize you weren’t a Christian, sorry about that. I also grew up religious and lost my faith for similar reasons.
→ More replies (0)3
u/northrupthebandgeek 18d ago
it’s still debated if the egalitarian ones were the original ones or the changed ones
Debated by whom? Last I checked, the scholarly consensus was that if anything the non-egalitarian writings of "Paul" are the ones that are likely edited or (in the case of 1/2 Timothy and Titus) pseudepigraphic.
even then women still had to follow all the Old Testament laws: even according to Jesus.
True, but it's worth noting that the "old laws" are different for Jews v. Gentiles (Mosaic Law v. Noahide Law, respectively). That difference was the basis for Paul arguing (in Acts 15) against requiring Gentile converts to undergo circumcision; only those subject to the Mosaic Covenant (i.e. Jews) have any such obligation.
1
u/tehm 19d ago
/s obviously. But also... they got a point.
2
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
I'm not so sure.
Surely, you don't think this sketch was an accurate depiction of what Jesus was communicating with that parable?
8
u/tehm 19d ago edited 19d ago
I think the sketch is an accurate depiction of how people today fail to comprehend what he was communicating with that parable.
I've heard that parable probably 50 times and you know how many times they decide to give context into what "a samaritan" is, how they were viewed contemporaneously, or especially where THEIR theology differed with that of the Jews of the day?
I think once you understand all of that, that the sketch is a very humorous take on what was fundamentally Jesus's most direct plea against racism... which incidentally, did require you to come from a place of racism to "get it". (IE you had to at least understand that the targets of the message were super racist against them. The parody here being that in the skit the target audience are more like TODAY'S audience who are like "What's wrong with being a Samaritan?" When, aside from racism, there's simply no answer: Humans are Human.)
2
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
Okay, I hear ya, but I was talking about Jesus. Not how many Christians today misinterpret him to justify their religious based bigotry.
2
u/tehm 19d ago edited 19d ago
Which circles right back to the humor of the skit.
When you AREN'T racist, the parable of the Good Samaritan... comes off a little racist. Not "Uncle Tom" or anything... but definitely a little "magic Negro" ya know?
I'm functionally Baha'i--if you're familiar with the religion this should all make sense. But if you're not, suffice it to say that I think that the figure of Jesus was AS liberal and "perfect" as a character could be made during that time period in order to achieve the goals of perfect worldwide Egalitarianism... but that this all happened 2,000 years ago in the middle of one of the most divided, aggressive, and patriarchal areas on earth. Obviously some concessions were gonna have to be made... Just like they were with The Bab--nothing wrong with homosexuality except that you absolutely couldn't express that 200 years ago in Iran. Same basic idea.
1
u/BlackBoiFlyy 19d ago
Meh, I don't think the name of the parable "Good Samaritan" is meant to hold that much weight.
It wasn't as if Jesus was implying that the Samaritan was an outlier. But that the Samaritan was someone they should aspire to be.
4
u/tehm 19d ago edited 19d ago
Yeah, no. The Samaritans were absolute pariahs in jewish society at the time.
Think "The Good Protestant" at an IRA meeting. "The Good Muslim" maybe, but even that doesn't really go far enough. That's what the skit is about. The joke was turning that on its head and making the listeners NOT racist.
→ More replies (0)1
u/FalseDmitriy 19d ago
I mean it didn't have a title in its original form. All those titles accrued over the centuries.
→ More replies (0)
94
89
u/Pilotwaver 19d ago
“The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt. I am the LORD your God.”
Leviticus 19:34
33
u/Cad1121 19d ago
In the very same book it allows the foreigners to be bought and enslaved under different rules than your own people. Leviticus 25:44-46
12
u/dystopian_mermaid 18d ago
Also the very same book they use to demonize the LGBTQ community, using a mistranslation. Lev 18:22
4
u/Private_HughMan 19d ago
Is it foreigners or is it non-Jews? Conversion was a thing for them at the time.
15
u/Cad1121 19d ago edited 19d ago
It doesn’t matter in the context the replied post. They’re saying the Bible’s anti-racism/othering under the same terminology, in the same book only 6 chapters away. It’s more of a nullification of their statement.
Edit: I reread the comment and it’s not better even if conversation is allowed. A “we can enslave you under different rules unless you join us.” is still immoral, othering, and potentially racist depending in how foreigners are categorized here.
5
u/AgainWithoutSymbols 18d ago
Deuteronomy 20:10-17
"¹⁰ When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. ¹¹ If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you.
¹² If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. ¹³ When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. ¹⁴ As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies.
¹⁵ This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby.
¹⁶ However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. ¹⁷ Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you."
2
u/MlkChatoDesabafando 15d ago
To cite a New Testament example:
"There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus" Galatians 3:28.
41
u/NuclearOops 19d ago
No true Scotsman fallacy.
Christians have hated people of certain or other races for as long as there have been Christians. All throughout that time they have been able to use their religious beliefs and cited biblical texts as the justification for their worldviews. Disliking a certain race of people is absolutely something compatible with Christianity, whether or not your vision of the religion accommodates such beliefs.
10
u/ThePurrfidiousCat 19d ago
It is almost impossible to find a dead set belief in that book of contradictions other than worship god.
6
u/dystopian_mermaid 18d ago
I would argue another one is “punish those who don’t believe the same as us” as a dead set belief.
2
u/ThePurrfidiousCat 18d ago
Love thy neighbor may contradict that though. Have a great day and take care.
5
u/dystopian_mermaid 18d ago
I said a dead set belief. Not what was in the bible. And holy shit if xtians treat everybody like their neighbors, then I’m hella happy not to live by one bc they overwhelmingly treat anybody who doesn’t conform to their ideals like shit.
Have a great day!
2
u/ThePurrfidiousCat 18d ago
Thanks. My bad thought you were talking about the bible. Some live their life by the good parts and some by the bad parts.
3
u/dystopian_mermaid 18d ago
I def agree there are some who live by the good parts, but the overwhelming majority do not. And even prefer the bad parts.
-3
u/ThePurrfidiousCat 19d ago
It is almost impossible to find a dead set belief in that book of contradictions other than worship god.
16
u/ReduxCath 19d ago
Christian, the Bible: "There is no Jew or Greek or Slave or Free, we are all one in Christ Jesus"
Some people, somehow: "I think people of a certain ethnic makeup should die. Gosh, I cannot WAIT to get to Heaven and be with the Lord! No [slur]s are gonna be there!"
8
u/Wismuth_Salix 19d ago
You left a bit out:
“there is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male or female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus”.
That last bit shouldn’t be forgotten while they’re trying their best to erase anyone who blurs the lines of gender.
5
u/ReduxCath 19d ago
Very much agree. ALL are welcome in Christ. Racism and sexism and any form of discrimination is not what God wants.
6
u/ZarquonsFlatTire 19d ago
Over at my parent's place recently my mom played some guy who was parroting and name dropping Nigel Farange.
He ended asking "how much doghshit would be OK in a parfait" before you threw the whole thing out? Whoever that guy was (he had Grey hair and British accent so credible to mom) I said Sounds like that dude's the dogshit, look at Brexit from Farange pushing for it.
Then I told her I didn't like YouTube and we watched 45 minutes of Death On The Nile before I decided to just leave.
3
u/Mpabner 19d ago
Think you posted in the wrong thread
-2
u/ZarquonsFlatTire 19d ago
I think so too. By any chance do you know a lot about about wiring standards 538a vs 538B for low voltage Cat5e cable?
Had a weird bit of shit not working earlier today, and I got it working eventually, but I don't know why my earlier attempts didn't work.
-2
u/ZarquonsFlatTire 19d ago
Basically I fucked up running a data line for my parents 3 times in one hour of playing with wires and after I fixed it I'm not sure where I got the first try wrong.
We've all tried to shoe off for our folks and hit a brick wall. I found a way around it but was asking on /r/lowvoltage what I did wrong.
2
u/Monty_Jones_Jr 18d ago
Christians suck at being Christian. And I don’t blame them, it can be hard sometimes. The venomous hate by which my ma speaks about her neighbors across the street is amusing to say the least.
Ma. He literally told you no.
2
u/AgainWithoutSymbols 18d ago
Jesus was racist towards the Pharisees; he collectively despised them just because some were hypocritical teachers.
Matthew 23:27-28
"²⁷ You Pharisees and teachers are in for trouble! You're nothing but show-offs. You're like tombs that have been whitewashed. On the outside they are beautiful, but inside they are full of bones and filth. ²⁸ That's what you are like. Outside you look good, but inside you are evil and only pretend to be good."
2
u/Sartres_Roommate 18d ago
God literally goes around genociding all sorts of races. Did literally has different rules of slavery for one race versus another.
…and if we look contextual on who he chooses to offer salvation; if you are from the Eastern Civilization….
Fuck You!
Best Regards, God
1
u/Boingoloid 19d ago
Or call or treat women like whores . His commission ran through north Hollywood and even non binary hookers is acceptable nom de heir if you're the most romcom eligible none of your business piece of ass moneymaker
1
1
u/GastonBastardo 17d ago
If the first Christians were anything like RedeemedZoomer, then Nero's reign would have had a reputation for cruelty towards animals: Captive lions were starved, thrown into a coliseum, and made to eat garbage for the amusement of a crowd.
1
u/SPRICH_DEUTSCH 7d ago
well not exactly, you cant always controll your emotions, but you can controll your actions and i dont think jesus would support you stripping away rights from a certain group of people because you „dont like them“
1
u/AwysomeAnish 6d ago
Question: How does this fit this subreddit? I'm not Christian so I don't know if racism is actually a part or if this is just another, "Haha religion bad" post.
•
u/AutoModerator 19d ago
Reply to this message with one of the following or your post will be removed for failing to comply with rule 4:
1) How the person in your post unknowingly describes themselves
2) How the person in your post says something about someone else that actually applies to them.
3) How the person in your post accurately describes something when trying to mock or denigrate it.
If your post consists of Reddit content, please note: If you haven't redacted usernames (or not done it thoroughly enough) than delete and repost. If the content comes from Conservative, or other toxic right-wing subs, then delete it and DO NOT repost! We're sick of that shit.
Thanks!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.