• NielsBohron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Except for the part when he called for his followers to take up swords and abandon their families (Matt. 10:34-36, among other passages).

      And the part where he claimed that loving the Father took precedence over treating others with love and respect (Matthew, Mark, and Luke), which opens the door for all manner of inhuman atrocities and hate in the name of “loving God”

      • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Matthew 10 is definitely more about conviction in the face of persecution, even from one’s own family, than literally taking up swords. Just a few verses earlier, 10:16, he specifically says to be harmless as doves.

        You’re gonna have to find me an actual verse on that second part, as I interpret it, “loving the Father” goes hand-in-hand with treating others with love and respect.

        • NielsBohron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Matthew 10 is definitely more about conviction in the face of persecution, even from one’s own family, than literally taking up swords.

          “I come not to bring peace, but a sword” is pretty unequivocal. Plus, consider “He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one” (Luke 22:36).

          You’re gonna have to find me an actual verse on that second part, as I interpret it, “loving the Father” goes hand-in-hand with treating others with love and respect.

          And as others interpret The Greatest Commandment, “love your neighbor” only applies to people that share the same ideals or religion. After all, there are multiple references in the New Testament to “God’s elect” (Rom. 8:33, Matt. 24:22) implying that those that are not “chosen” are somehow lesser. And is not exactly a new issue, as theologians have argued about predestination and God’s chosen people for centuries Foster, Robert Verrell (1898). Systematic Theology. Columbia University, among many others.

          It’s not exactly encouraging that the Son of God can’t even explain the most important commandments in a simple, unambiguous manner…

          • agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            The Son of Man. I don’t believe that Jesus was uniquely divine, I think he was uniquely conscious of the divinity within everyone.

            Religion is a centuries-long game of telephone. Jesus never wrote anything. Prophets are enlightened examples of humanity, but with enough time the message is bent and twisted by less enlightened examples. You don’t have to think he was some supernatural creature to agree with his message, and you don’t have to reject the message to recognize that greedy people exploit popular movements for personal gain.

            Trying to dismiss the message by poking holes in the secondhand accounts of his fan club is misguided. I should know, I spent long enough indulging in the practice myself.