@gucciloafers @ChristiJunior @Goalkeeper @matty @Frondeur @James_Dixon except I love jesus and have nothing but respect for people who follow him

@James_Dixon @ChristiJunior @Goalkeeper @matty @Frondeur I'll not address your initial threat to me with more than this, but I must direct you to acts 3:17 "Yet now, brethren, I know that you did it in ignorance, as did also your rulers". jesus forgave the jews, except obviously judas, who certainly resides in hellfire.

your statement that the romans were uniquely ignorant and thus blameless is unrealistic. you know pilate was said in luke to have mixed the blood of murdered jews with their animal sacrifices right? all contemporary sources about him show he was a very evil man. you are interpreting the romans as upright but thats just not true. they were a powerful empire, they were not likely browbeat into executing anyone. the roman guards humiliated and beat jesus, the soldiers divided his clothes. pilate is only made partly sympathetic in the bible to appeal to the new roman converts according to nearly all historians, and I'm interested in what happened to the actual jesus, a man who lived, died, and was ressurected.

as far as the guilt of the pharisees goes, most jews werent lawmakers and scribes, but were lay-believers.

here's more reading for you:

https://biblehub.com/q/Why_did_Jesus_forgive_His_crucifiers_2.htm

@fkq1q2r2 @alpha60 I dont want anyone to starve thats kinda my whole point. and I believe that that God exhibits both perfect justice and perfect mercy.

@meowski @ChristiJunior @James_Dixon my source is quite new and its from a libertarian think tank lmao

@meowski @ChristiJunior @James_Dixon yes, you were told that using the approach of households instead of individuals is misleading.

@vriska I mean yeah but they were lobotomized for lesbianism not for wearing pants

@meowski @ChristiJunior @James_Dixon you believe a lot of nonsense but I'll just shoot with this

https://www.cato.org/briefing-paper/immigrant-native-consumption-means-tested-welfare-entitlement-benefits-2023

@vriska those were (at least mostly) lesbians specifically but agree with the general sentiment

@James_Dixon @ChristiJunior @Goalkeeper disagree with most of this but I'll make this quicker, this boils down to your last point that immigrants are "lying thieves". obviously lying thieves shouldnt be given much, so you dont believe in charitable attitudes towards them. but youre wrong, most immigrants are peaceful and just want to provide for their house, just like you.

@James_Dixon @ChristiJunior @Goalkeeper @matty @Frondeur just want to say that I appreciate you engaging with me in a serious manner instead of being actively cruel and just calling me a jew or saying refugees should be murdered. I dont believe this interpretation though, that the jews (besides Judas and others who knew jesus personally) all knew exactly what they were doing and that jesus only referred to the romans. they didnt believe that jesus was God, if they knew He was God they likely wouldnt have been involved in his death. many of the romans were doing what they thought was right and snuffing out the movement of a man who many thought was a dissident king, and many of the jews were doing what they thought was right and snuffing out what they thought was a man who committing a grave sin by claiming to be I AM, God. in the bible unintentional sins are treated much more leniently than intentional sins, and jesus saying "forgive them father" is an extension of that. of course, for judas, he was not only betraying a friend, but committing to death the man who he knew to be God himself, holy and perfectly sinless.

@alpha60 God is love, you should try to be more like Him

@vonzeppelin SSRIs are great at making you "content" with misery

@nyx @georgia

> tradcath larper faggots

is it tradcath? I can't remember ever being taught in Catholic school that God was anything other than "all-loving"?

straight from catholic propaganda website:

> St. John tells us in his first letter that “anyone who does not love does not know God, because God is love. (1 John 4:8) John doesn’t tell his audience that God is loving. He tells them that God actually is love.

> Another reason we have for believing that God is love itself comes from philosophy. All theists believe that God is necessarily all-loving (i.e., God cannot exist if he is not all-good).

@lizzie that makes sense!!

@James_Dixon @ChristiJunior @Goalkeeper

>The English word is Jehovah.

Jehovah wasnt how the name is pronounced though. YHVH is a direct latinization of the ineffable name. we dont know the vowels.

>He said that was what the law required of us. He knew we couldn't do it.

the sermon on the mount wasnt a mere expounding of the existing law, it was a summation of jesus's teachings which radically reformed the law. jesus never spoke empty words, when you say of all his moral precepts "he knew we couldnt follow his words" you are saying his teachings were meant for an audience of no one. this is a protestant invention, that jesus is solely meant to be "believed" and not meant to be actually followed. love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you means exactly that.

>I will give the stranger of my excess in the manner I judge best when my own are taken care of, as 1 Timothy 5:8 says I should:
"But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel."

first off, these are the words of paul, not jesus, jesus said to take the stranger in and this doesnt abrogate jesus. paul is just saying you are first responsible for your own, which was historically interpreted not in the manner of a nuclear family home, but to mean your distant relations and friends as well, provided they were believers.

https://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_timothy/5-8.htm

"The words "his own," refer to those who are naturally dependent on him, whether living in his own immediate family or not. There may be many distant relatives naturally dependent on our aid, besides those who live in our own house"

"The circle of those for whose support and sustenance a Christian was responsible is here enlarged: not merely is the fairly prosperous man who professes to love Christ, bound to do his best for his nearest relations, such as his mother and grandmother, but St. Paul says 'he must assist those of his own house,' in which term relatives who are much more distant are included, and even dependents connected with the family who had fallen into poverty and distress."

theres nothing objectionable about this, its your interpretation of it which abrogates christ which is objectionable:

>My home and land are not excess.

you are interpreting your entire country as the same as your own household, which is an error. God in the old testament told the israelites to welcome strangers. “the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the LORD your God.” Leviticus 19:34
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/leviticus/19-34.htm I would read the entire commentary on this verse if I were you.

jesus's words were similarly clear: take in the stranger. that means into your own home if necessary, and when I have my own home I will take in strangers if I have the room. I promise you this.

>I'm perfectly willing to provide charity to the "least among us". But foreign invaders are not "among us". And they can receive my charity in the own lands.

immigrants aren't invaders, this is dehumanizing language. most immigration violation in the US is overstaying a legal welcome. the meaning of the stranger among you hasnt changed since Leviticus. do you give charity to the needy in other countries? I have.

>He also said there is neither male nor female in Christ, so I guess all the Christians died out in the first century, huh?

this is a sophistic imitation of reductio ad absurdum. paul meant that jewish and greek believers were equal, equal in Gods promise and equal in the church, so its only logical that you should also treat Jew and Greek alike in friendship, and likewise you yourself should not have preferences for Jew or Greek, for Israelite and stranger, for authorized and unauthorized immigrant, provided the person has shown you no unfriendliness.

>I'm willing to give of my excess to the stranger, just as the good Samaritan did. I'm not willing to take him into my home or homeland. That doesn't give him what's best for him.

giving in excess is good, not taking refugees into your "homeland" is unbiblical. its your opinion that its not what's best for him, its Gods opinion that the needy ought to be provided for when they entreat you.

@lizzie ah yes, charity, the word that now means something much less potent

@lizzie omg did you say this? waow!!

@nyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating also I think theyre just protestants not tradcaths

@nyx @ceo_of_monoeye_dating there are definitely countless places of worse suffering than kali yuga earth. its silly to think that this is the worst it gets, just like its silly to think that this is the best place. creation is vast and manifold! some hells are for many people with generic purifying duhkha, some are special hells for "special" sinners designed to correct and punish their particular bad tendencies/samskaras. but all are temporary.

@James_Dixon @ChristiJunior @Goalkeeper @matty "Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven." Matthew 5:19. being a christian isnt just about believing jesus died for you, its about following what jesus, perfect God and perfect man, said to do.