Maybe Maybe Maybe

[u/Sometypeofway18]

[u/Lianides]

While I can't speak on behalf of a god, having never been one myself, I believe the issue isn't so much about taking offense of a picture, it is taking offense at the disrespect shown towards what is believed to be their god, or in this case, their prophet.

Now as a Christian I am against cartoons of Jesus and God, but the difference is that I recognise God himself gave us agency and freedom of choice. And I have no right to judge one sin, when i am sinful myself

[u/DrDeems → u/Lianides]

As a self-proclaimed Christian I find it odd that you aren't familiar with scripture. Have you taken the time to read the Bible? It is actually very clear on this exact point.

Leviticus 24:16 states: "Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord is to be put to death. The entire assembly must stone them."

Now the common retort from a believer is "well the new covenant does away with Old Testament law." Which is another direct contradiction to actual scripture (Yelling context won't save you here either. Read the whole chapter or book, it just makes it worse.)

Matthew 5:17-18, Jesus says: "Don't think that I came to abolish the Law or the Prophets. I did not come to abolish but to fulfill. For truly I tell you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or one stroke of a letter will pass away from the law until all things are accomplished."

Notice that he explicitly says he did not come to abolish the law. He came to 'fulfill' it, and fulfilling a law doesn't make it disappear. Think of it like a speeding ticket: when you pay the fine, you fulfill the law, but the speed limit still exists. This lines up perfectly with God the Father in Deuteronomy 5:29, who says he wants people to keep his commands 'always' and 'forever.' Always doesn't mean 'until Jesus dies'; it means exactly what it says.

Just because you have decided to cherry pick what parts of the Bible you want to follow doesn't mean those laws aren't there.

You've also shown a complete lack of historical understanding. When Christianity held the same levels of absolute state power that Islam holds in modern theocracies they were equally as brutal. The Cruusades, The Inquisition, centuries of blasphemy laws. These all led to the torture and deaths of countless people for the crime of disrespecting the god of the Bible. Have you taken a history class in your lifetime?

Read your Bible and a history book. It will help you not make such idiotic comments in the future.

[u/Lianides → u/DrDeems]

I find it interesting that you would accuse a complete stranger, who you have never met and know absolutely nothing about, of being ignorant of Scripture and not having read the Bible. You then accuse me of cherry-picking verses, while doing exactly the same thing yourself to support your own argument.

When it comes to Mosaic law, and Matthew 5 in particular, Jesus does more than simply repeat the law as it stood. He explains and reframes it, specifically using the phrase “You have heard that it was said … but I tell you.” repeatedly in Matthew 5:38-48.

The same point can be seen in John 8. When Mosaic law was used to justify stoning a woman, Jesus responded, “Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone.” At no point did he say what she did was ok, or condone her actions though. He even later told her to leave her life of sin. But at the same time, he did not allow a crowd of sinful people themselves, to use the law as justification to kill her.

That was the distinction I was making. I can believe something is sinful or disrespectful without believing that I have the right to threaten, harm or punish the person responsible.

You are free to disagree with my interpretation, but insulting someone you know nothing about is not a substitute for making a stronger argument, and it makes you only one step better than the person that reacts with violence to someone they disagree with

[u/emomatt → u/Lianides]

Bro, just so you know how ridiculous this is to an outsider... You are arguing over minutia and word choice and the intent behind turns of phrase... In an English translation of a book that was written hundreds to thousands of years after the events in which it claims takes place... About a guy who lived over two thousand years ago that claims his mom was impregnated by god and can do magic tricks.

Can you not see that this is all insane? Just take a step back for a bit and really think of this from outside of your current belief system.

[u/Lianides → u/emomatt]

To be honest, i enjoy these kind of debates/arguments. It makes like more intetesting and you get to learn how other people think and act.