15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Republicans would be very upset with you using the bible against them, if they had ever read the bible to know what it said.
The usual response is “you only know a few cherry picked quotes, and would burst into flames if you actually read the whole thing” blah blah blah.
The next usual response is “Oh, I appreciate the warning from when you gave it a go.”
I get so tired of faith being used to hurt.
I could say “I read it all years ago, have you?”. Grew up in an evangelical church that encouraged us to read it surprisingly.
**But if God intended that the Negro race should be Segregated in Africa then why did He curse the children of Ham and decree that they should be the servants, or slaves, ot the other races?’’
God did not. Canaan was the only one specifically cursed to be a ‘‘servant of servants’’ (Genesis 9:20-27). Even if we admit the possibility that all his descendants were included in the curse (the best Bible scholars disagree on this point). we must still remember that Canaan was only one of the four sons of Ham and therefore he fathered only a MINORITY of the black race. And as I said before, even that servile minority were to live in a different part of the country from the Hebrews (Genesis 10:19).
It cannot be positively proven from the Scriptures that the Negroes were cursed to be black because of Nimrod’s rebellion or because of Ham’s sexual laxity at the time of his father Noah’s drunkenness. But there are some verses that seem to leave that implication. For example in Jeremiah 13:23 we read, ‘*Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.’’ Here the black Skin of the Negro is obviously a symbol of evil. This verse also shows that God meant for that skin to STAY BLACK and not be blended into a Thousand shades of mulatto.
The notion that the Negroes of this country have INHERITED the “‘deep Sunburn’’ that their forefathers are said to have suffered in Africa is ridiculous. Sunburns are not inherited, no matter how deeply they penetrate, not even by the first generation, not to mention the tenth or twelfth generation.
If we are to reject the curse of Ham and the rebellious leadership of Nimrod as explanations of why God made the‘Negro black then there is only one other possible explanation to be found anywhere in the Bible or out of it: THE GOOD LORD WAS SO ANXIOUS FOR THE HAMITES TO BE SEPARATED AND SEG- REGATED PEOPLE THAT HE MADE THEM RADICALLY DIFFERENT IN THEIR APPEARANCE FROM THE PEOPLE OF ALL OTHER RACES. He made their skin color different for for the same reason that He made their language different and for the same reason that He assigned them a different habitation… At least we would be much kinder and more charitable to our colored friends if we gave that explanation.
The southern Bible doesn’t read like yours and mine does, they made some notes in the margins.
interesting read, thanks!
This isn’t really new though, it’s just saying the quite part out loud. always-has-been.gif.
Neoliberalism is the cause of the decay and paved the way for fascism. If you let large conglomerates own everything including news media and social media and then sell access to spew vile hate speech and disinformation to people, the current result is to be expected. It’s actually kind of refreshing that they actually come out and say it.
These people also don’t believe in equality, they believe inequality of humans is fundamentally morally correct. Neoliberals believe in inequality based on class/wealth, fascists believe in inequality based on identity like race or gender.
The true sin is ignorance and neglect.
With flattery he will corrupt those who have violated the covenant, but the people who know their God will firmly resist him.
Daniel 11:32
He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior… He will use every kind of evil deception to fool those on their way to destruction, because they refuse to love and accept the truth that would save them.
Daniel 8:25, 2 Thess 2:10
… a despicable person will arise… a man of contempt… to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred. He will slip in when least expected and will seize the kingdom through flattery and intrigue.
Daniel 11:21
After an alliance is made with him he will practice deception, and he will go up and gain power with a small force of people.
He will try to change the set times and the laws.
Dan. 7:25
Daniel 8 and 11 here are talking about a prophecy that has already “been fulfilled” - common in the Bible to make these kinds of retroactive prophecies. The bad guy being described there is Antiochus.
That is just Daniel 8. Daniel 11 could reasonably be talking about modern times
Could literally be talking about billions of people from a period spanning thousands of years.
Which is why some people still hold it up as a valuable text. It’s a well written book of scams to keep the ignorant masses in line.
It is, in essence, a compilation of the vague shite that “fortune tellers” spew to the marks looking to be told what they want to hear.
Not really, from context pretty sure it’s one of those “ex post facto” prophecy things.
This is why people should read books of the Bible and not verse. Random bits out of context are used to imply so much BS.
Now then, I tell you the truth: Three more kings will arise in Persia, and then a fourth, who will be far richer than all the others. When he has gained power by his wealth, he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece. Then a mighty king will arise, who will rule with great power and do as he pleases. After he has arisen, his empire will be broken up and parceled out toward the four winds of heaven. It will not go to his descendants, nor will it have the power he exercised, because his empire will be uprooted and given to others.
The king of the South will become strong, but one of his commanders will become even stronger than he and will rule his own kingdom with great power. After some years, they will become allies. The daughter of the king of the South will go to the king of the North to make an alliance, but she will not retain her power, and he and his power will not last. In those days she will be betrayed, together with her royal escort and her father[ and the one who supported her.
One from her family line will arise to take her place. He will attack the forces of the king of the North and enter his fortress; he will fight against them and be victorious. He will also seize their gods, their metal images and their valuable articles of silver and gold and carry them off to Egypt. For some years he will leave the king of the North alone. Then the king of the North will invade the realm of the king of the South but will retreat to his own country. His sons will prepare for war and assemble a great army, which will sweep on like an irresistible flood and carry the battle as far as his fortress.
None of this is connected to Revelation, which was written centuries later.
Cowards fear empathy and maim their own capacity for it, because experiencing the pain of others hurts. Being surrounded by extreme, intolerable pain is the most difficult part of being vegan.
The mindset of magatards.
Anyone have the background link explaining this?
There’s an argument going around evangelical circles that “empathy” is more dangerous than compassion, with the analogy of jumping in to save someone in quicksand, but getting stuck yourself (empathy) vs throwing someone a rope and keeping your footing (compassion). Like if you understand a bad person’s thinking too much, you are dragged into their sin.
There’s even a tinge of women being more empathetic and “susceptible” than men.
It’s how it sounds.
Dig into the argument, and they all eventually end up focusing on dangerous progressive causes as tempting Christians, basically, and it feels like they’re trying to twist scripture into current MAGA doctrine. JD Vance (a Catholic, not evangelical IIRC) said something related on immigration, that loving your family and those close to you comes before loving distant neighbors, which the Pope very pointedly refuted.
Not a pastor, but this is what a certain used car-company salesman is spouting:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/03/05/politics/elon-musk-rogan-interview-empathy-doge/index.html
I posted a comment here with the context
Yeah, glad to see the specific instance but after trying to search I see this seems to be a broader doctrine. That you would absolutely hate people who “deserve” to be hated, accordingly to the viewpoint of whoever is preaching regardless of whether that person’s situation actually affects anyone other than themselves.
It’s kind of like the evil twin of “be tolerant, except of intolerance”: “be tolerant only of intolerance”
probably because he’s echoing what Elon said about empathy
I find it more than a little humorous that their defining attribute for the last hundred years is so easily abandoned
Cmiiw but isn’t the irony in the right also deeming Trump too dumb to be a threat to democracy? The thought of an articulate Trump that doesn’t make these sloppy mistakes paired with a steroids version of the dizzying policy reform this admin shells out…. 🏳️
Being a real christian is about to become cool, I guess?
Point or no point, it’s hard not to cringe when I see PizzaCake comics.
Why?
Enjoy the read.
Thanks for that. Having read it, though, I think it’s likely that I’ll forget about the details soon enough to continue nothing-ing her comics. The whole argument feels silly from the periphery.
Pizzacake comics might be a torture psyop.
“apparently a right-wing [person] said this” is low-quality content, gets my downvote. Such an unspecific comment serves only to outgroup people.
appreciate the message, but God can we please not share pizza cake comics on Lemmy, none of them were funny on Reddit and they’re not funny here.
Look, on many things, we probably agree. Maybe even more important things.
And I don’t even love this comic, its just, fine, its whatever.
That said I upvoted this comic to spite you and your comment here, because I don’t like your sentiment that people can’t like and share things that they like because your hipster instinct kicked in.
To be fair this is on comic strips not funny - there is no commitment to this being funny.
Humor is fairly subjective. You don’t want content because you don’t like it? That’s fundamentally against the concept of what Lemmy represents. This isn’t a website to cater to your whims.
