111
submitted 22 hours ago by jeffw@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world
top 11 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com 25 points 18 hours ago

TAX THE CHURCHES

[-] zaph@sh.itjust.works 48 points 21 hours ago
[-] Sabata11792@ani.social 5 points 11 hours ago

Oil tycoons

This is tax fraud using religion as a shield and a means to contoll the local rabble.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 5 points 20 hours ago

Jesus himself was probably just a faith-healing grifter, who when ever somebody asked him about wealth had a cheesy grin and an outstretched hand as he answered, "Yup. nope. that's basically impossible. Gimme all you rmoney, and you'll be fine though..."

[-] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 8 points 16 hours ago

I agree with everything but the fact that, of what is reported of Jesus, he was very anti-wealth, over and above what people need to get by and that a actual christianity is incompatible with capitalism.

To me, thats the part that certain types of "christians" need to be metaphorically slapped round the face with.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago* (last edited 15 hours ago)

“Actual” Christianity likely wasn’t fully developed until well after his death. The earliest gospel was written 40-ish years after his death. I imagine the historic Jesus would be very surprised by some of the things he apparently said.

Jesus was a Jew. He saw himself as Jewish, following the Jewish faith; as did the disciples.

Christianity itself developed over the following generations., and so did the doctrine and its teachings. It didn’t spring fully formed into existence.

Also… to be “fully human”…. Are you so sure he wasn’t a hypocrite? There’s always been people using religion for their own selfish desires.

[-] undergroundoverground@lemmy.world 3 points 12 hours ago

By actual Christianity, I mean Christianity in line with the things he was reported to have said, as opposed to ones that directly go against them.

Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. Theyre still the things he's reported to have said though.

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

The earliest written account of what he said was written- at the earliest- around fifty years after his death.

Most witnesses can’t can’t give an accurate testimony as to what happened 2 hours ago. Most prepared witnesses, with copies of statements in front of them still can’t accurately state what happened six months ago.

Mark was the earliest gospel written at around 70 c.e., with the others following across 2 or 3 decades. You are attributing a reliability to people that exists no where else.

You don’t have to take my word for this. Compare events and attributed sayings between the gospels, you’ll see that there’s plenty of distinctions. Some of that is that they were written by different people, from differing perspectives and for different purposes, to different audiences.

Some of that is that they were written across 20-30 years, during a time in church history where doctrine and attitudes were rapidly shifting and coalescing- a period of church history where it was first becoming something different than, and something new.

And all this ignores malfeasance on the part of the authors.

[-] Grass@sh.itjust.works 1 points 18 hours ago

as far as bible theories that will piss off the local churchies goes, this is almost as good as "rib was a poor translation, eve was made of adams penis bone and that's why humans don't have them"

[-] FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 0 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

I like watching them get pissed and flustered and then asking them if he wasn’t a faith healer.

I know. I shouldn’t be an ass, and it’s the “grifter” part they take issue with…. But it’s too easy.

In any case, from the perspective of contemporary mainstream Judaism, he was just another rando Jewish mystic grifting the rubes.

As a side note: contrary to popular belief, none of the disciples started as particularly broke- they were by and large successful businessmen.

[-] MediaBiasFactChecker@lemmy.world -2 points 22 hours ago

Propublica - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Propublica:

MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: High - United States of America
Wikipedia about this source

Search topics on Ground.Newshttps://www.propublica.org/article/tim-dunn-farris-wilks-texas-christian-nationalism-dominionism-elections-voting
Media Bias Fact Check | bot support

this post was submitted on 03 Oct 2024
111 points (100.0% liked)

politics

18973 readers
3082 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS