• NielsBohron
    link
    fedilink
    English
    210 months ago

    Religion is a centuries-long game of telephone. Jesus never wrote anything.

    Then why the hell did you bother asking for chapter and verse? Classic apologetics fan; ask for an example or evidence and then equivocate when you get exactly what you asked for.

    Trying to dismiss the message by poking holes in the secondhand accounts of his fan club is misguided

    Considering that the only thing left of the “enlightened” prophet are the secondhand accounts of his fan club, I’m not sure exactly what you think “the message” is…

    I’m dismissive of “the message” not because it’s easy to poke holes in the theology and historicity of the Christian bible (although it obviously is), but because there is no consistent theology or message that can traced anyone with any sort of reliability. If that’s all there is to glean from exhaustive apologetics and exegesis of “the teachings of Jesus,” I won’t bother to go to a religion or guess “WWJD” for that; there are plenty of better moral frameworks and more consistent belief systems out there.

    • @agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Then why the hell did you bother asking for chapter and verse?

      To point out that, even after the game of telephone, it still doesn’t say what you claim it does.

      I won’t bother to go to a religion or guess “WWJD” for that; there are plenty of better moral frameworks and more consistent belief systems out there.

      Which of those moral frameworks encourages antagonizing the beliefs of strangers?

      • NielsBohron
        link
        fedilink
        English
        210 months ago

        To point out that, even after the game of telephone, it still doesn’t say what you claim it does.

        How so?

        You still haven’t claimed anything at all other than “WWJD is a good rule of thumb,” with which I disagreed and provided examples of why I believe that WWJD is not a good moral or ethical model.

        Which of those moral frameworks encourages antagonizing the beliefs of strangers?

        Plenty of religions and secular moral frameworks value truth and honesty over protecting the feelings of others. Do I particularly care if I change your mind? No, you are entitled to your own beliefs and that’s fine. However, I’ve seen enough evil done in the name of WWJD and “God’s love” that I’m not going to ignore the questionable (and IMO irresponsible) claim that WWJD is a good moral framework when it’s presented in a public venue where others might read it.

        If you don’t want to be challenged on it, keep your religion to yourself.

        • @agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          0
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I disagreed and provided examples of why I believe that WWJD is not a good moral or ethical model.

          You didn’t though? You brought up a verse about swords taken wildly out of context. You seem to be confusing a general tendency for charity, tolerance, and forgiveness with the entire combined corpus of various sects. What evil has been done in the name of WWJD? Sure, the Catholic Church has been co-opted by bastards essentially since it’s inception, and most other sects have their share of bastardry, but what does that have to do with emulating the most consistent elements of Jesus’s teachings? Forgive your trespassers, help the struggling, love your neighbor as yourself.

          And to be clear, it’s not my religion. I do not profess to be a member of any Christian sect. I just think that most of the things Jesus himself said (or is purported to have said) are generally a good moral baseline. Further, based on his position on the Pharisees, I’m sure he himself would take serious issue with the evil done ostensibly in the name of his church. All the more support for WWJD.

      • @afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        210 months ago

        Which of those moral frameworks encourages antagonizing the beliefs of strangers?

        The parts when he says how they are going to hell? Or the part when he talked about a future time when his followers would murder those that opposed him.