Why has this site seen a huge turn towards Christian shit? It smells waaay off. Like, Russel Brand and all these other influencers turn Christian and this forum becomes overrun with worshippers of the Lord God of Israel via the Jesus psy op.
Why have TPTB decided to shove Christianity down everyones throats and flood boards with Christian bots etc?
Are they trying to strengthen their grip over us spiritually by reinforcing their original deception or what?
he did say that, but only to his twelve apostles when sending them out to proselytise. It wasn't general advice to all.
In fact, he purposefully kept his 'sheep' in the dark, revealing his teachings only to his cronies. Thus:
Mat 13:10 And the disciples came, and said unto him, Why speakest thou unto them in parables? Mat 13:11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. Mat 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. Mat 13:13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand.
Jesus, pretending to impart wisdom to his followers, was actually just stringing them along whilst purposefully deceiving and confusing them.
Jesus warned his fellow Jews not to give holy things to the dogs (gentiles) or cast their pearls before swine (also gentiles)
at 7:6 Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.
This is also echoed in the story of the Canaanite woman:
Mat 15:24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mat 15:25 Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. Mat 15:26 But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast it to dogs. Mat 15:27 And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.
The dogs are the gentiles whilst the children are the children of god, the Jews. Only when the Canaanite woman acknowledged the Jews as 'masters' and her own status as a 'dog' did Jesus deign to help.
This is the true Jesus - a thoroughly unpleasant, hateful, racial supremacist literary figure posing as a good guy whilst deceiving even his fellow Jews with unfathomable parables but hoarding his real secrets for his inner crew - just like all secret societies since. He is not a purveyor of truth, but a gatekeeper of it.
Did you have a better teacher than Jesus?
Your methods here are not following logic. (1) "Not general advice" is your assumption; (2) Jesus told the apostles to speak his words from the rooftops, and they did, contrary to your assumptions; (3) "Purposefully deceiving and confusing" is your assumption, as there is no deceit and the parabolic style is not confusion; (4) "Dogs" and "swine" didn't mean Gentiles per se any more than "sheep" or "serpents" meant Israelites, they were metaphors; (5) Jesus praising the woman's great faith and her receiving healing after he tested her sincerity are contrary to your narrative.
But let's imagine your "thoroughly unpleasant, hateful, racial supremacist literary figure posing as a good guy whilst deceiving even his fellow Jews with unfathomable parables but hoarding his real secrets for his inner crew - just like all secret societies since .... not a purveyor of truth, but a gatekeeper of it" for a moment. As I linked from c/Atheist, someone had to have written out the life of this character and to plot out such distinct moral teachings and claims of divinity as were hardly conceivable in those days. It would take a Jesus to invent a Jesus. Someone is there with great truths, and the simplest truths there are not hidden but are clear to children. And when I compare this to every other religious etiology in existence I find this one the best, the fullest, and the incomparable, by many objective standards. The Bible's Jesus requires us either to accept his ways or to despair of finding anyone whose ways can be accepted. That's the choice I ask you when I redirect you to whether you are willing to pursue the truth wherever it leads.
I'm sorry but I don't think you are really engaging in good faith here at all. Hoping to cast doubt on whether I'm being logical et al and trying to reduce what I say down to me making 'assumptions'. No, what I'm doing here is pointing out what the Bible itself says, thats all, and demonstrating to you that it is not for you but against you. You should be attempting to play the ball and not the man.
The 'dogs' in both of those examples DO refer to the gentiles. You can assert otherwise, but at least show your working.
Thanks, but it looks like you focused on the minors and ignored my primary questions. You don't get to critique the Christians using what you think is Christian interpretation and then not propose your own moral system, because by denying Christianity you have no right to proclaim judgment about its interpretation. That's othering.
Are you committed to follow truth wherever it leads? If yes, we can investigate where in my 50 linked points you think the truth diverges from my conclusions; that would allow us to judge questions about meaning of "dog", for instance. If no, then you're the one in bad faith and you're projecting that on me. I ask that question of people because it separates those interested in persuading me, at the risk of learning something new, from those who aren't mature enough to accept that risk.
Your OP ball is that Yahweh is not to be worshipped but you have no better alternative. That's the ball I'm playing. If you want to run from that ball it's on you.
I can do what I like and am under no obligation to propose any alternative belief systems, as though you can’t expose a belief system without replacing it with another.
I could sense from your initial injection into my conversation with the other fella that your goal would be to derail the topic away from what the scripture plainly says and into, well, anything else besides.
I’ll not be engaging with you on the topic anymore. If you can stick to your scripture and speak knowledgeably about it then be my guest.
If you have taken Jesus advice and rendered yourself childlike and naive and accepting these things purely on the say so of the book itself then, fair enough. That is your prerogative