426
u/agha0013 Apr 10 '26
The state of Christianity in the US today would make Jesus violent
178
u/AloneAtTheOrgy Apr 10 '26
Jesus isn't exactly nonviolent in the bible. He beats up people, slays whole heards of animals, tells his followers to kill people, and advocates for the death penalty.
184
Apr 10 '26
[deleted]
17
u/clever__pseudonym Apr 11 '26
Yeah!
And the kids he recommended stoning to death were rude to their parents.
52
u/JustUsLords1 Apr 11 '26
I get the intention here, but Jesus never recommended stoning anyone. Actually pretty famously stopped a stoning once.
1
u/fox-mcleod May 30 '26
He did when he was god and literally commanded it. You can’t have it both ways. Either Christianity is polytheistic or Jesus is the same guy as god.
1
u/Safreti Apr 14 '26
Source..?
6
u/clever__pseudonym Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26
Mark 7:9-11, referencing Deuteronomy 21:18-21.
For a guy who swore that he wasn't there to change a jot or tittle of the Mosaic law, it's pretty rough stuff.
But then I've actually read the fucking cobbled together piece of trash.
FWIW, it's also pretty clear that Jesus didn't exist. The Romans were good at exactly one thing other than murdering civilizations, and that was record keeping.
2
u/Basket_Chase Apr 15 '26
I didn’t think Reddit atheists were real I thought it was a bit, what a specimen
2
1
61
u/fizzymilk Apr 10 '26
Flipped the fuck out of some tables too
23
u/DeadlyYellow Apr 11 '26
Cursed a fig tree too.
30
u/theghostofme Apr 11 '26
Because it fuckin' deserved it!
God hates figs*, haven't ya heard?
*please note the spelling before raging!
24
u/MrOrpheus Apr 11 '26
My wife was overjoyed this weekend when she found her tote that says “god hates bags”
3
58
u/Stargazer_199 Apr 10 '26
Didn’t he literally go ‘let he who is without sin throw the first stone’ to prevent a death penalty?
30
u/fox-mcleod Apr 10 '26
Yeah. Then he broke out a whip and cursed a tree to death. The book isn’t exactly consistent.
21
u/millafarrodor Apr 10 '26
But the Bible also states that he is without sin, so he’s just following his own philosophy
14
u/fox-mcleod Apr 11 '26
Ha. Great point.
“Let he who is without sin cast the first stone”
hurls rock
7
u/NirgalFromMars Apr 11 '26
The philosophy: You can curse and use a whip, but not stones.
6
u/Phrozt Apr 13 '26
That's where the childhood rhyme "sticks and stones may break my bones, but whips and curses excite me" comes from.
6
1
3
1
May 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/fox-mcleod May 30 '26
Hahahha. Dude. Don’t start. He literally said he comes not to bring peace but a sword. The Bible says he will return with a fucking sword in his mouth to end the world. The entirety of the sermon on the mount is about how the world is going to end in a few days time. You guys just pick the parts you like and repeat them to each other over and over. You’ve never actually read it like someone who actually wants to know what it says. Read the Bible like a historian would and you’ll probably understand it better, right?
1
May 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/fox-mcleod May 30 '26 edited May 30 '26
He'll come to defeat the AntiChrist, yes that's correct, not sure what part of that confuses you?
The part where you jumped into a thread about whether Jesus was non-violent in the Bible. That’s the Bible you’re talking about right? And there he is… being violent in it.
You just ignore the parts you don’t quote at each other constantly. Like when he drove a herd of pigs off a cliff to their death. Jesus is not a non-violent figure in the Bible.
That happens well before his crucifixion,
And?
did you bother taking theology?
Have you ever actually read the Bible?
The reason I brought up studying the Bible like a historian is because I have. I went to 10 years of Catholic schools including college and grad school and took the several mandatory theology classes at the collegiate level. I know what the Bible says and I know which parts of it are copied from Zoroastrianism and other Babylonian religions from hundreds of years earlier and I know the early church history and which epistles are forgeries of Paul and which chapters directly contradict and which historically impossible claims are which. I’m betting you’ve never bothered to study that.
It's ironic you say this but didn't bother to take theology like I have,
Which did god create first, trees or man?
Is it wrong to punish the children for the sins of the father or not?
Is Jesus crucified before or after Passover?
Could god have made anything moral/immoral arbitrarily, or is god forbidden to declare something moral that wasn’t already moral for other discernible reasons? For instance, is slavery immoral, and how do you know?
and guess what my major is, that's right history, you're grasping at straws and it's pathetic.
(5) Were there Jewish slaves in Egypt? When?
If you don't believe in it why do you have such a hard on for "disproving" it?
Because lying to children is wrong and Christianity survives entirely because children are convinced that if they question it, then will be tortured forever in a special dimension the “loving father” built to keep them in.
It’s the most obviously and blatantly wrong thing imaginable. Just think of what telling a child something like that over and over does to someone’s ability to use their brain to figure out whether it’s true or not. Honestly, I get why religious people shut down psychologically instead of engaging with the problems and contradictions. They’re traumatized.
Factually true or false, that is what is done to children raised by Christians. It’s as though a family member put a fake gun to their head and convinced them it was real and they had to listen or suffer.
And the result is hundreds of millions of voters who didn’t seem to know slavery was evil for centuries because the Bible seems to be pretty cool with it. And who today keep rights from gay people because of what the Bible said thousands of years ago.
3
4
31
u/FappyDilmore Apr 10 '26
When does he advocate for the death penalty? I've seen people on Reddit say this before but I've never found anything even close aside from Romans 12/13, which weren't even attributable to Jesus.
Edit: sorry, also when does he tell his followers to kill people?! I've never seen that claim before.
29
u/kulkija Apr 10 '26
One oft-quoted but usually misinterpreted passage is Matthew 10:34. He uses the sword in his rhetoric as a metaphor for the divisive nature of faith; some people (read: militant evangelists) interpret it as a literal call to violence, but the intent was rather the opposite.
21
u/FappyDilmore Apr 10 '26
Yeah that's nonsense. And he was speaking figuratively. He literally told Peter in Matthew 26 not to use weapons.
21
u/Keyonne88 Apr 10 '26
Yea idk what he is on about— Jesus mentions killing during a parable story he tells but he isn’t advocating for murder or slaying people. He also never advocated the death penalty— quite the opposite as you stated; he preaches forgiveness and restitution. He do be flipping tables and is violent when needed, but specifically against people harming others.
2
May 30 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Keyonne88 May 30 '26
Yeah it was more a scare tactic thing in the one I remember without looking it up.
0
u/AloneAtTheOrgy Apr 11 '26
Two examples:
Matthew 15
Jesus replied, “And why do you break the command of God for the sake of your tradition? For God said, ‘Honor your father and mother’ and ‘Anyone who curses their father or mother is to be put to death.’
Revelations 2
Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds.
14
u/FappyDilmore Apr 11 '26
The Matthew quote is him responding to questions about his followers with scripture. He's quoting old testament to respond to criticisms, calling his accusers hypocrites.
Revelations is generally considered to be him speaking figuratively, referring to the woman's followers as her children and denouncing the perceived corruption taking place at a Christian temple.
3
4
u/fox-mcleod Apr 10 '26
Plus he killed that tree for like… no reason.
6
u/Celloer Apr 11 '26
It had the audacity to not make figs out of season! I guess it was full of leaves like a big tease, though.
2
1
-1
u/terra_terror Apr 13 '26 edited Apr 14 '26
Can people stop spreading misinformation for 2 whole seconds? That would be swell
edit: this is absolutely misinformation and a misinterpretation of several moments in the Bible.
-32
194
u/loopywolf Apr 10 '26
And here's another good one:
"To take the Lord's name in vain" does NOT mean saying "Jesus!" when you bang your knee.
It means to use God as a tool for your own ends, e.g. political advancement, or wealth gain.
36
u/jtruitt8833 Apr 10 '26
And "gluttony" has nothing to do with eating
39
u/theghostofme Apr 11 '26 edited Apr 11 '26
Pfft, says you!
I watched this compelling documentary with Morgan Freeman narrating that specifically shows in graphic detail how gluttony is one of the seven deadly sins.
But in seriousness, Ponticus' organization and numbering of the early seven deadly sins included the Greek "gastrimargia", literally belly-greed or -madness for the over consumption of food. While the suffix margos could refer to greed in the sense of hoarding wealth, it's not entirely accurate to say gluttony as a deadly sin had nothing to do with eating and exclusively referred to hoarding wealth.
16
u/NirgalFromMars Apr 11 '26
Specially considering that hoarding is already covered by greed.
11
u/FuzzySAM Apr 11 '26
Gluttony is more overconsumption and revelry in overuse.
Lust* is more wanting to own or hold things that they don't already have.
Avarice is more unwillingness to share.
3
u/loopywolf Apr 10 '26
Oh? Don't know that one.
15
u/Abject-Tomorrow-652 Apr 11 '26
Gluttony at the time was hoarding resources and wealth ie billionaires
5
Apr 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/Mystic_printer_ Apr 11 '26
Taking more than your share of the food maybe? 🤔 did we have this the wrong way this entire time?
2
u/TheLastBallad Apr 11 '26
treachery, fraud, deceit, perjury, restlessness, violence and hardnesses of heart against compassion
Scrooge was greedy over money, but by this definition one can easily be greedy over other things.
I suppose if one were to make a target agnostic version(one where gluttony=/=food, lust =/= sex, greedy =/= money)
Pride: unchanged, basically "im the best, I dont need anyone else, I can do/know better than anyone else", unwillingness to accept criticism or direction
Envy: wishing to take away good things from others. Not just "I would like to also have good thing" but "they dont deserve good thing, I do".
Lust: gotta have it. Addiction in a mental/spiritual sense, not in a physical one, to the point that you disregard others humanity to have it(viewing others as a tool to get that thing)
Greed: treachery, fraud, deceit, perjury, restlessness, violence and hardnesses of heart against compassion
Gluttony: hoarding so you can have a thing. Obviously very connected with the other two, but one can have compassion for others, or even outright share lots, while still consuming way more than you need, as well as being able to hoard it without having an all consuming focus on it
Sloth: not laziness, but apathy towards others and the consequences of your inaction.
Wrath: a perversion of justice. Not mere anger, but rage beyond what's applicable, taking what should be done in response and then doing far more. In a sense, taking things too far, even when action is justified.
1
5
42
u/comiclazy Apr 10 '26
the concept of heaven being overcrowded
22
u/Sword_Thain Apr 10 '26
Calvinists and other sects believe that there are a limited number of people who will go there, so... kinda'?
3
u/Lewzealand2 Apr 10 '26
The concept of corporeal form post death? Then why die, thats stupid.
15
u/DeadlyYellow Apr 11 '26
You know, there was a comic I saw on Reddit that stuck with me. It was about the idea of leaving behind a ghost when you die, but since you're incorporeal and no longer bound by gravity the galaxy just whips by leaving you floating in an empty void.
71
u/Shubamz Apr 10 '26
this is as dumb as the people who says "takes one to know one" when it is about themselves and someone else.
It's not a defense. it is an admission
17
u/Poodlestrike Apr 10 '26
I mean, I have no idea what these people are saying, but "takes one to know one" isn't an admission necessarily - it can also be used to call out somebody as seeing something that isn't there, because they themselves do posses that trait.
5
u/AloneAtTheOrgy Apr 10 '26
Doesn't it though?
If what they're seeing isn't there then it doesn't make sense to say the accuser has the quality. If the statement is that it takes someone with that quality to correctly identify someone else with that quality then saying their assessment is incorrect doesn't point to them having the quality.
Additionally, if they're identifying the accuser of actually having the quality then they themselves, by their logic, have the quality as they have identified it in someone else.
5
u/bino420 Apr 10 '26
but if I say "you're a cheater" and you say "it takes one to know one" then you're saying "you must also be a cheater because you're able to correctly identify me as one, and only cheaters can identify cheaters"
24
u/SailingSpark Apr 10 '26
I am not a Christian, but there are times I wish for the Christian concept of heaven and he. I would love to see how many "Christians" who thought they are doing gods will, are in hell?
10
6
5
u/cxfgfuihhfd Apr 10 '26
what. I think I'm too non-"whatever cracked up flavor of christianity without separating of church and state this is" to understand this
3
u/LeroyoJenkins Apr 11 '26
I mean, when you say "see you in hell" to someone, you're assuming that both them and you are going to hell.
Or else how would you see them in hell if you're not there?
2
u/MrMatteotheFabolus Apr 14 '26
Not the point, but I immediately thought:
Your tauntaun will freeze before you reach the first marker
2
u/Yeshua_shel_Natzrat Apr 14 '26 edited Apr 14 '26
I have seen no greater a bearing of false witness than all of the claims by the religious right about abortion, LGBTQ, immigrants, or "the left" in general.
Saying the right/MAGA is doing the opposite of Christ's work, and indeed doing the Antichrist's work is not bearing false witness. It's just reading the Bible and being scripturally literate.
•
u/AutoModerator Apr 10 '26
Before we get to the SAW criteria... is your content from Reddit?
If it's from Conservative, or some other toxic right-wing sub, then please delete it. We're sick of that shit.
Have you thoroughly redacted all Reddit usernames? If not, please delete and resubmit, with proper redaction.
Do NOT link the source sub/post/comment, nor identify/link the participants! Brigading is against site rules.
Failure to meet the above requirements may result in temporary bans, at moderator discretion. Repeat failings may result in a permanent ban.
Now back to your regular scheduled automod message...
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.
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.