You must log in or # to comment.
Jesus Christ was a man who traveled through the land Hard working man and brave He said to the rich, “Give your goods to the poor.” So they laid Jesus Christ in his grave.
Obligatory Jesus Christ by Woody Guthrie reference.
And here are some endearingly goofy church nerds singing it:
I found a YouTube link in your comment. Here are links to the same video on alternative frontends that protect your privacy:
The root of Christian behaviour is doing really sinful things, then feeling really bad about it, which makes it ok. Actually trying to change things so that we can eliminate the sinful things is a worst act than actually sinning.
*pretending to feel bad about it
Fuck, was I supposed to be pretending back when I was a christcuck?
well you weren’t supposed to actually feel bad
Nah if you’re a kid or a poor you’re supposed to actually feel bad, because that makes you more vulnerable to manipulation.
American Evangelicals must first receive a christian education before they can receive an atheist reeducation
If you wanted to really commit to everything Jesus said, you’d basically have to give away all your shit and do charity work or something similar. A good chunk of Christian theology since then is why you don’t actually have to do all that, since being poor sucks and that’s no way to grow a religion.
protestants are not real christians
gotta pay tithe to the pedo kings of rome or it doesn’t count
exactly, that’s what I’ve been saying
I mean, the majority of USAan Christians are hypocrites who have never studied (let alone read) their holy texts
It’s not surprising that they instead follow the civil religion of the USA where the apostles are the founding fathers and the body and blood of Christ is cold hard cash
I usually place this into a different perspective.
Many Christians in the U.S. do study their holy texts. However, it is extremely, extremely rarely that they do so with an attempt to understand the context in which it was written and how to understand and apply the advice that it gives in a modern context, and almost always about agreeing and confirming their in-group biases, often relying on increasingly absurd justifications as to how their religion is in fact historically universal, and simultaneously trying to argue that faith is the only thing necessary for salvation, but also to that there is a bunch of historical evidence that everything that happened in the Bible is real, and that the prophecies will come true.
It’s basically like trying to argue about if Goku could beat Superman. People will throw out hundreds of citations, contradict themselves with the canon, as the canon is also contradictory, but it ignores the fundamental issue that neither Superman or Goku are real, therefore it is completely up to the individual’s imagination who would win, and arguing about it is an exercise in futility.
Like there are Christians out there who will openly profess to studying ‘apologetics’, not realizing that that was the term their detractors historically used to make fun of them, because they are constantly ‘apologizing’ for issues from the scriptures.
But again these are often people who think that the Bible is the Word of God, but also reject the entity (the Catholic Church) that compiled it.
It doesn’t matter how much they study their holy book because they aren’t actually interested in a rational discourse around it.
Haha yeah power scaling is pretty dumb
the entity (the Catholic Church) that compiled it
this particular view is professed only by the Catholics themselves. Orthodox and Miaphysite Christians see the Roman Church as having split from the original Christian community, viewing themselves as the unbroken continuation.
most Protestants, meanwhile, though accepting the Western dictum of seeing the Eastern churches as schismatics, usually believe that the Latin Patriarchate has been corrupted over time or, in the case of some more radical groups, is the product of usurpation altogether.
This is very true.
However, my overall point still stands. The Orthodox and Miaphysite Churches, while viewing themselves as non-schismatic, still don’t make the fundamental error of viewing the Bible as the end-all, be-all document on what it means to follow a Christian tradition, that American Protestants do. They at least understand that a document, even one as important and foundational as the Bible, that comes out of a human institution, one that could produce a schism such as the Catholic Church, is probably not the sole end product which only then requires interpretation to receive divine knowledge.
true, true. i agree with you, just couldn’t stop myself from bringing up that particular quibble, sorry.
It’s all good, I should have expected someone would bring that up, I just rarely deal with believers in the Orthodox Church and never the Miaphysite Church, here in the U.S., even though I used to regularly attend Orthodox mass for about a year (had a buddy who grew up in the Church and didn’t have a car).
Aren’t the most important bible stories about rejecting god? They don’t want to be good, they want to receive divine punishment again.
