• teft
    link
    fedilink
    74
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    You forgot my favorite parable, The Cleansing of the Temple:

    And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers’ money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father’s house a house of merchandise. John 2:15-16

    Jesus whipping money lenders will always make me chuckle.

      • kase
        link
        fedilink
        64 months ago

        ┻⁠━⁠┻⁠︵⁠└⁠(⁠՞⁠▽⁠՞⁠ ⁠└⁠)

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      84 months ago

      It wasn’t about money changers, it was about the people selling animal sacrifices. The money changers just enabled them.

      This is more explicitly laid out in Mark where it prohibits carrying anything through the temple.

      That gets conveniently left out in Matthew where he copies from it as there’s a bit of a theological paradox if it’s Jesus’s death that makes animal sacrifices pointless and he’s telling people to stop killing animals to cleanse their sins while still alive.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        54 months ago

        It gets even more juicy if you learn the context at the time. It was about loans. Jesus wiped the debt records. Jesus;DROP TABLE HIGH_INTEREST_LOANS

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          4 months ago

          It wasn’t about loans. It was about animal sacrifices.

          There is discussion of forgiving debts elsewhere, particularly in apocrypha, but the temple episode was about the sacrifices.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    474 months ago

    The concept of racism didn’t exist in 1st Century Judea. That being said, the parable of the Good Samaritan relies on bigotry.

    Despite being superficially a complement, “Good Samaritan” is supposed to be ironic. Samaritan “goodness” must be unexpected for the story to work.

    Imagine a parable of “the generous Jew” or “the industrious black man”, and you’ll get the idea.

    Mitchel and Webb did a great sketch on this:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OIVB3DdRgqU

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      394 months ago

      The story makes sense (in context) because of animosity between Jews and Samaritans, going back many years. A modern equivalent might be a Trump supporter helping out a democrat, or a Russian helping a Ukrainian.

      John 4:9 gives a good illustrates this situation. In that story, a Samaritan woman is surprised that Jesus would talk to her when he is a Jew. It also illustrates that Jesus very much went against the culture of the day in his relations with Samaritans.

      So, Jesus’ wasn’t making a statement about whether Samaritans were good or bad - he was explaining that being someone’s neighbour is about how you treat them, not who you are. A modern parallel might be the famous 'today you, tomorrow me’ story on reddit.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        9
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        The story makes sense (in context) because of animosity between Jews and Samaritans, going back many years.

        The story relies on prejudice, that’s my point. Jesus didn’t say “Seminarians were as good as Jews”, he said “Jews are worse than Seminarians”.

        There are dozens of examples from the Bible where prejudice and bigotry are explicit. Hell, the whole concept of a “chosen people” implies that some people are better than others. Jesus ordered Saul to genocide the Amalekites. And if you notice, Jesus punished Saul for not killing every single last one, which implies that genocide isn’t just permissible, but a moral duty.

        ( I know that these stories are from the OT and you’re probably annoyed that I said Jesus instead of God, but according to the sign out on route 519, Jesus is God. Y’all still believe that, right? )

        • @GreyEyedGhost
          link
          154 months ago

          He said being a Jew or Samaritan doesn’t make you good or bad. Neither does your position (Levites and Pharisees were very powerful and respected). Your actions are a reflection of who you are.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      6
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      The concept of racism didn’t exist in 1st Century Judea

      The concept is as old as mankind. Details (replace ‘race’ with ‘guy from next tribe’, same concept) or it’s name maybe not.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        34 months ago

        That’s called bigotry or jingoism, depending. Racism is a distinct flavor, and much like “Orange didn’t exist as a color before the 15th century,” there lacked the basic concept of a race as determined by skin color vs other identifiers such as language, city-state-affiliation, or religion.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      54 months ago

      The concept of racism didn’t exist in 1st Century Judea.

      Were Jews not already looking down on others as the “chosen people”? They may not have had supremacy, but I would expect that they considered their rulers inferior. Maybe my mind is polluted by what Zionism has become. Also, I recognize that not all Jews are Zionists.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      34 months ago

      Samaritans are still around by the way. Not a lot of them, but there’s <1000 or so that hold on. Their beliefs are pretty similar to Judaism (they probably separated during Assyrian conquest? But this is very messy history)

  • theprogressivist
    link
    fedilink
    39
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    That’s what I dont get. White Nationalists hate the Jewish but worship Jesus, who is also Jewish?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      30
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      They love their made up Jesus.

      Their made up jesus loves Guns, Racism, Money, and hates brown people and kindness.

      Which is fitting for people who have never bothered to read the bible outside of some mistranslated quotes their greedy, money grubbing and hate mongering preachers repeat ad nauseam.

      • WashedOverOP
        link
        28
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        I still think of this if they were to meet the “real” Jeebus

      • TimLovesTech (AuDHD)(he/him)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        114 months ago

        Also remember that today’s Bible was retold by a game of telephone before being written down. It was then written in a tongue the average person on the street could not read, this was so that they could not translate it themselves and were at the mercy of a preacher to tell them what it said. It was illegal to translate and/or distribute a copy of the texts.

        This is all to say that had any of it been real, it is more than likely to have been reshaped over the years, before white nationalists have now added their own spin.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          84 months ago

          I sometimes wonder if any of it was a game of telephone. If you take out all the parts that are borrowed from Greco-Roman and traditional Jewish writings you are left with so little. Enough that it could have been made up by the authors. We don’t have direct evidence of the oral tradition or even someone remotely natural hinting it existed.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      134 months ago

      Everyone reimagines the story in their own image. Whatever you want him to be be is what he is. That’s the great thing about fiction. Why Vampires glitter now.

    • Marxism-Fennekinism
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I mean Christians have always had a history of hating Jews. Absolutely not defensible obviously, but not a recent outlier either.

    • Flying Squid
      link
      fedilink
      24 months ago

      I’ve been told, unironically, that Jesus was the first Christian.

      So I guess he worshiped himself?

  • NegativeLookBehind
    link
    fedilink
    364 months ago

    Pretty sure he had an AR-15 and lived in a trailer park in east Kentucky, check your facts dude

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    324 months ago

    Poor and homeless? Dude was a carpenter. He wasn’t rich but my understanding is that he made sure his family were looked after before changing careers. He wandered, but he could have gone home at any time.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      14 months ago

      The way I heard it the better translation is day laborer.

      I am curious, if the story happened the way it is documented why didn’t your Jesus tell his mom that he was alright? He could clearly appear to people after dying. Not a single word about him visiting his poor old mom and telling her not to be upset about her son being tortured and murdered? If I had some power to offer any comfort to my family after death I would definitely do it.

  • Sc2Pirate
    link
    fedilink
    314 months ago

    When I was a kid I got in trouble for telling people at church Jesus was “African-american” my dumb kid mind thought that was the only acceptable way to say “not white.” I don’t think I was ever able to explain what I meant.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    314 months ago

    I once saw a cartoon with a church with a sign “No homeless people allowed inside” and Jesus stands before the sign and doesn’t enter

  • MudMan
    link
    fedilink
    294 months ago

    Honestly, leftie Jesus is a bit of a whitewashing itself. If you read the Bible the guy is petty AF half the time, especially with people who aren’t entertaining religious solicitors and keep throwing his gang of preaching cultists out of places. I’m cool with calling out the hypocrisy of Christian right-wingers, but let’s not pretend Christianity doesn’t have a ton of built-in garbage along those lines. I mean, understandably, it’s the preachings of some random guy 2000 years ago, so does Plato, but still.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      134 months ago

      Yeah I think biblical Jesus is really strongly anti divorce, for example. Some of the Christian right are also hardcore on that stance, but a lot aren’t. Probably because that’s hard for them personally.

      Matthew 19

      19 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went into the region of Judea to the other side of the Jordan. 2 Large crowds followed him, and he healed them there.

      3 Some Pharisees came to him to test him. They asked, “Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for any and every reason?”

      4 “Haven’t you read,” he replied, “that at the beginning the Creator ‘made them male and female,’[a] 5 and said, ‘For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh’[b]? 6 So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”

      7 “Why then,” they asked, “did Moses command that a man give his wife a certificate of divorce and send her away?”

      8 Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning. 9 I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.”

      10 The disciples said to him, “If this is the situation between a husband and wife, it is better not to marry.”

      11 Jesus replied, “Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given. 12 For there are eunuchs who were born that way, and there are eunuchs who have been made eunuchs by others—and there are those who choose to live like eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. The one who can accept this should accept it.”

      That’s probably where people infer a lot of anti-gay stuff, too.

      I don’t think jesus’ take there is very good, but I don’t identify as a Christian n

      • WashedOverOP
        link
        5
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Let’s not get started on the thrice married and looking for a 3rd, morality police too…

      • tygerprints
        link
        fedilink
        34 months ago

        Thankfully most people don’t live their lives by what’s laid out in the bible, which is a book of fiction. Of course men wanted to control women and sought to make “laws” to make it difficult for women to leave abusive situations, which is why you find this kind of unsympathetic tripe in the bible.

    • Marxism-Fennekinism
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      He killed a tree because it didn’t produce fruit as if the tree was deliberately holding out on him. Like you’re literally God who literally created all living organisms, surely you understand how trees work and how they will turn off fruit production if conditions aren’t right (namely if they don’t have enough nutrients for it), and that it’s an automatic response which the tree has no conscious control over because you didn’t even design them to have a nervous system.

      I mean, also the “I love you unconditionally, on the condition that you worship me otherwise I will personally throw you in hell” thing.

  • @Showroom7561
    link
    194 months ago

    Don’t forget that Jesus has such a bad temper that he cursed a fig tree so it would never bare fruit again.

    The reason? It didn’t have any figs because it was the wrong season, and he had a temper tantrum. 🤡

      • @Showroom7561
        link
        74 months ago

        And didn’t bother to tell people to wash their hands because of germs, which could have easily saved hundreds of millions of lives before science discovered it. 🤡

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    15
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    He was also Socialist by definition.

    But TBF the whole white jesus concept came from Christianity’s spread from Rome and Northern Europe, not from Republicans in the USA.

    • MudMan
      link
      fedilink
      15
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      People probably overestimate how “non-white” Jesus would be at the time. The whole skin color thing is a very colonial concept. I don’t know that in a world centered in the Mediterranean people would have thought of Italians as “white” and Northern Africans or Middle Easterns as “non-white”.

      So in a way maybe yeah, “white Jesus” is a very American invention, just not necessarily in the way Americans parse it. US racial categories don’t work anywhere else even today, anyway.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        34 months ago

        No, it’s much older than the US. It’s a European invention, just as the US is fundamentally a product of European colonialism.

        • MudMan
          link
          fedilink
          24 months ago

          Sure. Point is, it’s a product of colonialism and full-on anachronistic. Americans in particular keep trying to apply their modern categorizations, which both leftists and conservatives have fully internalized, to all places and times and it really doesn’t work.

    • oce 🐆
      link
      fedilink
      44 months ago

      He advocated for the social ownership of the means of production?

      • PorkRoll
        link
        fedilink
        64 months ago

        Yeah it’s in Numbers 3:17

        “To the carpenter, his hammer. To the mason, his chisel. To the worker, his labor.”

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      43
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      Really interesting topic actually but most early ‘Christians’ didn’t really think of themselves as converts but rather just Jews who understood Jesus to represent the ‘completion’ of Jewish script and prophecy.

      Best example is Paul who most definitely continues to view himself as a Jew.

      Anyone interested should check out a book like ‘Did Jesus Exist?’ by Bart Erhman or a Marginal Jew (huge read). There’s a better book by him on the topic but blanking on the title

      • cheesymoonshadow
        link
        fedilink
        104 months ago

        I’ve been binging Ehrman’s podcast and videos and really appreciate how thoughtful and intellectually honest he is and his skill at explaining things for the layperson.

        You can also tell from his choice of words that he is careful to separate fact from his own opinion. When someone asks him a question, I’ve heard him many times start an answer off by saying what other scholars believe, and then he explains why he disagrees, but he always is open to being wrong.

        In a YouTube video I listened to just this morning, someone asked him a question (when did they start capitalizing the pronouns He and Him in the Bible translations?) and he just honestly said he didn’t know, then he asked the audience if anybody knew.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          74 months ago

          He’s very good. Only interacted with his books, but they share a similar vibe with him being very clear about where he deviates from the mainstream and why.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    144 months ago

    Roundheads (who later settled Massachusetts as Puritans) believed that Jesus would return to the center of the world (aka London, obs) speaking English to establish the New Jerusalem.

    This Anglo-Jesus idea then got brought here.

    • kronisk
      link
      fedilink
      34 months ago

      Don’t forget the mormons. “Actually, Jesus visited America before he ascended to Heaven! A stone in a hat told me so!”