It’s so funny because all the time they tried to ignore the fact that their Jesus was in fact what they would call a socialist.ä and pretty many stuff in the bible says things like:
„It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.“ — Mark 10:25 (You hear that Kenneth Copeland? Well you look like the devil himself already.)
“So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.“ — Matthew 6:2 (Basically the opposite of what most of them full blown proud Christians do. Isn’t pride even a Sin?)
„And all those who were of the faith were one in heart and soul: and not one of them said that any of the things which he had was his property only; but they had all things in common.“ — Acts 4:32 (That’s probably a ancient Woodstock feeling.)
„If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?“ — Johannes 3:17 (Tax the rich is basically this, but with more steps.)
“Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.” Then all the people shall say, ‘Amen!‘“— Deuteronomy 27:19 (Can you see it? It says build the wall and cage children without their mothers right there.)
That’s in the context of someone asking if they should pay taxes which is seen as either a gotcha question from someone in the crowd (advocating not paying taxes was a serious crime) or was added later by the Roman state when they canonized the Bible.
More likely that it was added in during the late first century.
It’s anachronistic for Judea in ~30 CE given there was no personal tax, no coins with Ceaser’s image on them, and the term 'Ceaser’s to refer to the emperor hadn’t become a colloquialism to the best of our knowledge.
But had an author of a gospel been writing in, say, Alexandria later on where there was a personal tax and there were coins with Ceaser’s image on them and it had become a way of referring to the emperor, you might expect to see that line added in.
Similarly is the emphasis on marriage being between a man and a woman.
Perhaps less socially relevant before Nero married two men while emperor of Rome, which takes place after Jesus was crucified but before most scholars think the first Synoptic gospel was written.
Then on the flip side of the survivorship bias are things that a historical Jesus probably said that aren’t in canon, such as saying 81 in the Gospel of Thomas:
Let one who has become wealthy reign, and let one who has power renounce .
Quite relevant to Pilate’s reign when Tiberius had inherited being emperor rather than earning it through merit and had abandoned the throne to party on an island for years but didn’t hand over the position to anyone else.
Also a line seemingly referred to in 1 Cor 4:8.
And yet it shouldn’t quite be surprising that the version of texts decided to be canon right after the emperor of Rome had converted to Christianity doesn’t include the pithy line decrying dynastic rule.
So? That’s still clear respect for the state. It doesn’t say “I don’t believe in the state, but kid you should probably still pay taxes to stay out of jail”.
The debate, which I won’t go into here because Im on a phone and not nearly familiar enough with Koine Greek, is whether that was something added decades later by the government or whetjer the person asking Jesus that question was trying to entrap him. I suspect it us the former myself.
There’s no debate since the church sees the bible as canon. The whole point is moot, since either the bible is canon, or the whole thing is garbage (I lean the latter).
That’s not what canon means. Most denominations that were not founded in the USA do not hold a literal view of the Bible. Many recognize that men wrote and assembled the books.
“Then the Lord spoke to the Tech Support, saying, ‘Thou shalt never install pre-release software on devices whereof thou lackest a backup, and which thou usest daily. For the Lord is aware that thou wouldst miss thy data.’” John v3.6(Public Beta)
Don’t evangelicals hate Harry potter?
Or is it now acceptable for anti woke reasons?
Jesus is woke now too apparently.
Guess nothing really matters to the right wing/evangelicals except more hate
Exactly.
It’s so funny because all the time they tried to ignore the fact that their Jesus was in fact what they would call a socialist.ä and pretty many stuff in the bible says things like:
„It is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.“ — Mark 10:25 (You hear that Kenneth Copeland? Well you look like the devil himself already.)
“So when you give to the needy, do not announce it with trumpets, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and on the streets, to be honored by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full.“ — Matthew 6:2 (Basically the opposite of what most of them full blown proud Christians do. Isn’t pride even a Sin?)
„And all those who were of the faith were one in heart and soul: and not one of them said that any of the things which he had was his property only; but they had all things in common.“ — Acts 4:32 (That’s probably a ancient Woodstock feeling.)
„If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person?“ — Johannes 3:17 (Tax the rich is basically this, but with more steps.)
“Cursed is anyone who withholds justice from the foreigner, the fatherless or the widow.” Then all the people shall say, ‘Amen!‘“— Deuteronomy 27:19 (Can you see it? It says build the wall and cage children without their mothers right there.)
IMO he an AnSoc as he isn’t pushing for hierarchies other than God.
Well. It’s not like it’s consistent. Pretty bad writing actually. All the lore about plagues and stuff.
It’s almost as if there were dozens of writers
He respects the. Though “give to Cesar what is due to Cesar” or some BS. Definitely not an anarchist.
That’s in the context of someone asking if they should pay taxes which is seen as either a gotcha question from someone in the crowd (advocating not paying taxes was a serious crime) or was added later by the Roman state when they canonized the Bible.
More likely that it was added in during the late first century.
It’s anachronistic for Judea in ~30 CE given there was no personal tax, no coins with Ceaser’s image on them, and the term 'Ceaser’s to refer to the emperor hadn’t become a colloquialism to the best of our knowledge.
But had an author of a gospel been writing in, say, Alexandria later on where there was a personal tax and there were coins with Ceaser’s image on them and it had become a way of referring to the emperor, you might expect to see that line added in.
Similarly is the emphasis on marriage being between a man and a woman.
Perhaps less socially relevant before Nero married two men while emperor of Rome, which takes place after Jesus was crucified but before most scholars think the first Synoptic gospel was written.
Then on the flip side of the survivorship bias are things that a historical Jesus probably said that aren’t in canon, such as saying 81 in the Gospel of Thomas:
Quite relevant to Pilate’s reign when Tiberius had inherited being emperor rather than earning it through merit and had abandoned the throne to party on an island for years but didn’t hand over the position to anyone else.
Also a line seemingly referred to in 1 Cor 4:8.
And yet it shouldn’t quite be surprising that the version of texts decided to be canon right after the emperor of Rome had converted to Christianity doesn’t include the pithy line decrying dynastic rule.
So? That’s still clear respect for the state. It doesn’t say “I don’t believe in the state, but kid you should probably still pay taxes to stay out of jail”.
The debate, which I won’t go into here because Im on a phone and not nearly familiar enough with Koine Greek, is whether that was something added decades later by the government or whetjer the person asking Jesus that question was trying to entrap him. I suspect it us the former myself.
There’s no debate since the church sees the bible as canon. The whole point is moot, since either the bible is canon, or the whole thing is garbage (I lean the latter).
That’s not what canon means. Most denominations that were not founded in the USA do not hold a literal view of the Bible. Many recognize that men wrote and assembled the books.
What’s Johannes? Never heard of that book.
John. Lost in translation.
John 3:17 is “For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.”
I John I think. But it’s there in Johannes. But in German. 😅
Ah, I see. I didn’t realize there was more than one John.
“Then the Lord spoke to the Tech Support, saying, ‘Thou shalt never install pre-release software on devices whereof thou lackest a backup, and which thou usest daily. For the Lord is aware that thou wouldst miss thy data.’” John v3.6(Public Beta)
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Evangelicals don’t give a shit about anything, their just nihilists coping by acting like they read a bible.