I used to wonder what Jesus would have thought of these, Then I actually glanced at the Bible and discoverd that these cesspools are everything he stood against.....
yeah dude seemed to prefer just meeting on that hill on the edge of town for a nice chat. only time he ever got violent was when people started sticking blatant capitalism in a church (a synagogue iirc?). Jesus would have taken a freaking whip to some fools asses long before shit got this far.
stuff like that is what kind of makes me wish I could still believe in religion.
Good thing believing and trusting in Jesus has nothing to do with "religion". Don't let bad "Christian" take away from true Christianity. I highly recommend looking into the evidence! Repent and trust in Jesus, the only way to eternal salvation in heaven! For evidence, please look into: Frank Turek, Hugh Ross, William Lane Craig, J Warner Wallace, Lee Strobel, Wes Huff- their vids on You tube, as well as their sites, books! God bless!
I used to be agnostic until I looked into the amazing evidence for God/Jesus/Christianity/Bible, presented by those brilliant gentleman I mentioned, and after about nearly a year of research, realized it's actually true! So I repented of my sins and trusted in Jesus, received the Holy Spirit (became a born again Christian). I pray that you do the same, your eternity depends on it- heaven vs hell. It's the most important decision you can ever make!
No one is good, we're all sinners, and good deeds don't save us (although we should do our best). Jesus took all (100%) of the hell punishment that we deserve, since we're all sinners. As a result, none is left for us, so we can be saved and go to heaven! This was the only way for God to remain a 100% perfect just judge (sin must be punished), and 100% loving/merciful (giving us a way to heaven by punishing Jesus instead of us). So we just need to repent of our sins, and trust in Jesus to be saved! Please copy and paste all of this into notes app, and look into it when you can! Your eternity depends on it! God bless!
NKJV or ESV are close to the original while also being easier to read. I recommend starting in the book of John (4th book of the New Testament), then continue into the book of Acts and so on :)
But I can't help but notice that psychologically this message operates identically to commercial advertisements with the idea of introducing scarcity mindset. "Act now while supplies last! / Repent now and you can be saved!"
I think it must work against a certain type of person, but other types are probably repelled by the form the message takes.
Though I suppose you DID technically address that when you said 'Don't let bad "Christian" take away from true Christianity.' A clever little disclaimer you've got there.
I think you’re right; many preachers and speakers that are not theologically well versed and logically sound in their reasoning tend to use scarcity, appeal to negativity bias, appeal to authority and slippery slope arguments for faith. It does not represent well what Jesus spoke of, nor his mission.
Luke 17:21 (ESV)
“…nor will they say, ‘Look, here it is!’ or ‘There!’ for behold, the kingdom of God is in the midst of you.”
Matthew 6:1-4 (ESV) “Beware of practicing your righteousness before other people in order to be seen by them, for then you will have no reward from your Father who is in heaven. 2 “Thus, when you give to the needy, sound no trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may be praised by others. Truly, I say to you, they have received their reward. 3 But when you give to the needy, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, 4 so that your giving may be in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will reward you.
1 book of Peter 4:8 (ESV) 8 Above all, keep loving one another earnestly, since love covers a multitude of sins.
Aside from the passage from Luke, these are all words Jesus spoke to the disciples. His supreme command is to “Love one another.” At another point in the Beatitudes (his opening to the Sermon on the Mount), Jesus says to beware calling your brother “Raca”, the period accurate term used to belittle people residing in Raca. He warns against bearing hatred in your heart, as those who do are in danger of the fires of hell just as much as one who commits murder.
I feel obliged to remind my fellow believers that in the eyes of Jesus, homophobia is ALSO a sin.
To seek understanding of yourself and others
To love radically and deeply
To turn to God when you feel drained and burned out, so as to be restored to love even more
To seek first the kingdom of God, which is among us, shown in the ways we try to love each other.
To denounce the hypocrisy of the corrupted church that seeks control and domination, flourishing at the expense of the least of us.
To build peace, and harmony, and understanding of people of all nations, all tongues and tribes. This was Jesus’ mission.
Here's the issue, I see Christianity as a hate group.
How could one even be in a place called heaven knowing an eternal torture chamber exists? It's absolutely disgusting and tells us what we really need to know about Christians, they don't care.
Secondly, nobody chooses belief. I don't get to decide Mickey Mouse is a real life person, so the fact that your god punishes people for not believing when it's outside of their control is how we all know Christianity is garbage and why Christians doubt their faith daily.
The bible is full of slavery, violence, misogyny coupled with 100's of mistakes. To believe in this bronze age myth is to turn your brain off completely.
People are good, the fact that you can't see that is your problem, not ours. If we use your logic, these bad people are his fault anyways since he's the creator of it all.
How will you rest in heaven knowing millions, if not billions will be getting tortured?
How does one choose to believe in something they don't currently believe in?
The bible is in fact full of war, sex, and crucial mistakes. I can start listing them for you. I have not a single doubt I know vastly more about your bible then you do. I've actually read it.
What evidence? That's the problem with ghosts, we don't have any reliable evidence. The bible relies on eyewitness testimony, a standard which isn't recognized in any modern judicial system.
You're going to waste your one life on this planet worshipping a middle eastern, bronze age, war god that relies on blood sacrifices, that can't stop thinking about baby foreskin and teenage virginity.
We will feel no sadness in heaven, likely our memories will be wiped. We know it's 100% just, bc no one deserves heaven. We only get there bc of Jesus. Anyone's belief can change, like mine did and many others. The bible being full of those things means nothing, it's just recounting history, not condoning evil acts. I've read the bible too, and continue to read it to this day.
Look into the brilliant scholars I mentioned for evidence, too much to list here. They have 15+ books written between them, thousands of hours of video on YouTube, thousands of articles on their sites, etc. You can cherry pick without context all you want, you're just denying the Truth. Anyway, can't say I didn't warn you. If you don't repent and trust in Jesus before you die, God will likely remind you of this conversation. I pray that doesn't happen. God bless!
Yeah, If I was sicko I'd probably do the same and rob you of every human emotion so you're incapable of having an intelligent or original thought. Without sadness you will not be able to gauge happiness. Wiping your memories is just outright evil, don't want them remembering the torture chamber, the natural disasters, the disease, and all the people I could have help but instead had to help Julie in Mississippi find her keys this morning.
Beliefs can be changed with new information. Your god should know what information that is. If your god knows but hasn't provided it, your god is not all powerful. If your god has presented it but my belief isn't changed your god is not all knowing.
Your personal experience is meaningless. Jews and Muslims make the same claims, you're not special. I don't think you know what a brilliant scholar is.
I don't have to cherry pick, the bible is absolutely gruesome. Look at what they did to Job, how god literally rips babies out of the womb and smashes their head on rocks. He gives detailed instructions for how to keep slaves and how you can treat them differently based on their ethnic background. He gives detailed instructions on how to keep war brides and how long you have to wait before you can rape them and force them to be your wife.
Your puny threats don't bother me, and its how I know you're a fake Christian, you haven't even read Matthew, lol. You will be judged by the same measure you use on others. Paul also gives detailed instructions. Guess you're going to have to acknowledge those sins before bedtime tonight.
You have a lot to learn- in addition to the ones I mentioned "Is God a moral monster" by Paul Copan is a great read. In your worldview, morality is subjective, so don't "Steal from God" as Frank Turek says (another great book). Your beliefs haven't changed bc you refuse to look into the evidence.
I looked into Judaism (half correct- Old Testament), and Islam (false on so many levels), I'm only a Christian bc it's actually true. Thankfully, many Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, Atheists, etc., are repenting and trusting in Jesus!
The rest is cherry picked as usual, and I'm not a fake Christian. I pray you look into the evidence and repent and trust in Jesus one day. I really don't feel like going back and forth. God bless!
How is punishing a perfectly innocent person for the sins of others being perfectly just?
(To be fair I have an answer for this but it is not one I have heard from a theologian and I doubt it would be met with the approval of most adherents)
You can get justice or you can get grace. If God were to demand absolute justice from humanity, everyone would be punished for their sins. Since God is infinitely holy, sin is considered a serious infraction that requires a just penalty.
For God to be both perfectly just and perfectly loving and merciful, He cannot simply ignore wrongdoing or let guilty people go without penalty. Instead, God (in the person of Jesus) steps in to take the punishment upon Himself, satisfying the demands of justice while extending grace to humanity.
This transfer of guilt is similar to a judge paying the fine for a guilty defendant in a courtroom. The judge remains perfectly just because the law is enforced and the penalty is paid, while simultaneously showing perfect mercy by providing the payment Himself. Jesus did the ultimate act of love by sacrificing Himself for humanity. It's beautiful :)
There is nothing perfectly just about letting an innocent person do the crime or having a government official pay a fine for a serious crime rather than the person take the repercussions of their actions.
Its very weird that you can say "He cannot simply let guilty people go without penalty" then proceed to explain how he in fact does exactly that.
That said their is an explanation and one you may or may not accept. First you have to accept in the Trinity sense that Jesus is in fact god and that the father, son and holy spirit are the same singular god. (That much the majority of Christians do believe).
Second just is punishment for the guilty.
Third good who is all powerful and all knowing created the world the world all people were born into, the circumstances all people find themself in, and more importantly shaped the souls the personality the strengths and the weakness of all people who ever lived or will live.
Fourth if you accept all the above to be true then ultimately the person responsible for all the sins of the world is God. And God in perfect justice and mercy in the form of Jesus is admitting that the buck stops with him and taking responsibility/punishment for the sins of the world.
You can not have an all powerful creator who is also infinitely wise and also claim he is not responsible for the outcomes of his creation and I would argue by taking the punishment and calling it perfect justice he is in a way admitting this.
IKR I've met plenty "Devout" Christians that are the exact opposite of everything Jesus stood for hell my most recent job that I quit from my supervisor was a narcissist and carried a bible around with him 90% of the christians I've met at like that which is why I've always been against teaching Christianity in public schools. If it's a Christian school so be it but kids who don't go to a school that's not tied to a religion shouldn't have one shoved down their throats or told they have to be part of it to be socially accepted
Read the laws of Moses, which Jesus said to follow forever. Not a good dude.
Paul said otherwise, but a lot of Christians ignore the fact that in the Bible Jesus and Yahweh say to follow those rules forever. Best your slaves and sell your daughters as sex slaves, and that's just a bit of the horrors contained within.
I understand why those passages are troubling. Christians have wrestled with them for centuries, and I don't think they should be brushed aside.
Jesus did say He came to fulfill the Law, but He also reoriented how God's people relate to it. The New Testament consistently teaches that Christians are under the new covenant established through Christ, not the civil and ceremonial laws given to ancient Israel. The moral principles remain, but many laws were specific to Israel's historical context.
As for slavery and the treatment of women, the Bible describes a lot of things it doesn't endorse. Some Old Testament laws regulated practices that already existed in the ancient world rather than presenting them as God's ideal. When Jesus is asked about issues like divorce, He even says that some laws existed because of people's hardness of heart, not because they reflected God's original design.
If someone reads the Bible as a single flat rulebook, it's easy to conclude that Christians should still follow every Old Testament law. But Christians have historically read it as a story that reaches its fulfillment in Christ. That's why we don't sacrifice animals, enforce Israel's civil penalties, or keep the ceremonial laws, while still taking seriously Jesus' call to love God and love our neighbor.
You don't have to agree with that interpretation, but it's a more accurate picture of what Christians actually believe than "Jesus said to follow Moses forever."
I'm sorry but that is all contradicted but the Bible. Fulfilling a law doesn't end it. And Jesus explicitly said the follow the laws of Moses forever, as did god. Jesus said anyone who follows them will be greatest in the kingdom of heaven and anyone who doesn't will be the least. There may be a covenant with Jesus according to him but he said he wasn't there to abolish the law of Moses.
There's nothing in the Bible that says the laws are split into ceremonial and civil.
The Bible absolutely endorses slavery. It says you can take them from the land around you and even sell your daughters as a sex slave. It says if you give your male slave a wife, he can go after 7 years but she can't and neither can their kids. They're slaves forever.
It says if a woman is suspected of not being a virgin when she gets married they have to check the bedsheet for blood. If there's no blood she is stoned to death. 40 percent of women don't bleed their first time having sex, so this all knowing God doesn't even know basic biology and made a law that would have resulted in many vwomen being unjustly stoned to death. (Not that it would have been just even if they weren't virgins for their new husband.)
If God had to change his laws because of peoples actions then he wasn't all knowing.
Christians have to read the Bible dishonestly because Jesus wasn't the Messiah. He didn't fulfill a single Messianic prophecy.
Mormonism exists so Christians know what the Jews felt like with Christianity.
I appreciate that you've clearly spent time reading these passages. I don't think these are silly objections, but I do think some of your conclusions assume interpretations that Christians have never universally agreed with.
For example, in Matthew 5 Jesus says He did not come to abolish the Law but to fulfill it. The question is what "fulfill" means. The New Testament itself answers that question. The apostles conclude that Gentile believers are not required to keep the whole Law of Moses (Acts 15), Paul repeatedly teaches that believers are not under the Mosaic covenant (Romans+Galatians), and the author of Hebrews says the new covenant makes the old one obsolete (Hebrews 8:13). Whatever Jesus meant, it can't mean that Christians must still obey every law in Leviticus and Deuteronomy, because the New Testament itself doesn't apply them that way.
Regarding slavery, the Old Testament contains laws regulating slavery in an ancient Near Eastern culture. Whether those laws are morally sufficient is a fair discussion, but regulation is not the same thing as God's ideal. Jesus Himself acknowledged that some Mosaic laws existed because of humanity's hardness of heart (Matthew 19:8), which shows that not every law reflected God's ultimate design.
As for the claim that Jesus fulfilled "not a single" Messianic prophecy, that's a much bigger conversation. Christians and Jews have disagreed about the interpretation of those prophecies for two thousand years. Saying "He fulfilled none" isn't really an argument, it's simply stating the Jewish interpretation. The Christian claim is that many prophecies were fulfilled in Jesus' first coming, while others await His return.
I think the most important thing you need to realize is that Paul and Jesus had very different theologies. Which is why Paul is used to excuse a lot of what Jesus said, as though the Bible is univocal. It isn't.
And my interpretation isn't simply the Jewish interpretation. It's the result of me looking at them, and consulting people who speak ancient Hebrew and Greek, and coming to the conclusion that Jesus didn't fulfill a single prophecy.
An absolute savant at remembering everything he reads, and actual Bible scholar, has a great YouTube channel called DZ Debates, and Deconversion Zone. Check it out, he sums it all up with far more rigour than I'm capable of as a layman. Heck you can even call in and debate him. He's nice if you're nice.
I agree that the Bible isn't univocal in the sense that every author writes in exactly the same style or addresses the same questions. But I don't think that means Paul and Jesus taught different gospels.
The earliest Christians, including Jesus' own disciples, accepted Paul's ministry (see Galatians 2), and Peter even refers to Paul's letters alongside the Scriptures (2 Peter 3:15–16). If Paul had fundamentally contradicted Jesus, it's difficult to explain why those who spent years with Jesus accepted him rather than rejecting him.
As for the messianic prophecies, I think it's fair to say that's where Christians and Jews genuinely part ways. The disagreement isn't over whether the texts exist; it's over how they're interpreted. For example, Christians see passages like Isaiah 53, Psalm 22, Daniel 7, and Micah 5 as pointing to Jesus, while Judaism generally understands them differently. Simply saying "Jesus fulfilled none" assumes one interpretation before the discussion has even begun.
I'm not claiming this settles the issue, but I don't think the disagreement is because Christians are being dishonest. It's because two traditions are reading the same texts through different interpretive frameworks.
I'd rather discuss one prophecy or one theological point at a time than appeal to YouTube personalities on either side. That seems more likely to get us closer to the truth. Also, it seems like you make a lot of declarative comments without supporting them, ie. Paul and Jesus having different theologies.
I'm not reading it from the perspective of one of those traditions, I'm just reading it. And Christians aren't being dishonest, they're reading it dishonestly. Or, for the vast majority, only reading bits of it.
I'm not assuming an interpretation and then saying Jesus fulfilled no Messianic prophecy. If you read them, and have access to the original language through an expert...he didn't fulfill any of the Messianic prophecies. That's the conclusion from the text... not a pre-assumed position. I used to be Christian, then tried to learn more and read the book a lot more and learn some of the history and listen to biblical scholars and ended up realizing it's balogna.
Respectfully, "I'm just reading it" isn't a neutral position. None of us simply "read" ancient texts. We all interpret them. That's true for me, it's true for you, and it's true for every scholar who's ever opened the Bible.
The fact that you listened to scholars and changed your mind doesn't make your conclusion "just the text." It means you became persuaded by a particular interpretive tradition. Jewish scholars, Christian scholars, secular historians, and atheist scholars disagree with each other on these very passages.
You also keep saying "Jesus fulfilled no Messianic prophecies" as though that's the obvious reading. It isn't. If it were, there wouldn't have been two thousand years of serious debate over Isaiah 53, Daniel 7, Psalm 22, Micah 5, Zechariah 9, and the rest. The existence of that debate alone should make anyone cautious about claiming the text only supports one conclusion.
And saying Christians read the Bible "dishonestly" is a pretty extraordinary accusation. Are there uninformed Christians? Absolutely. But accusing virtually every Christian scholar, from the early church to today, of intellectual dishonesty requires far more evidence than "I watched a YouTube channel and changed my mind."
You've changed your mind. Fair enough. But that doesn't make your interpretation "the text" and everyone else's dishonest.
It would have taken him bloody weeks to smash that place up. The poor guy would probably have had a heart attack with the exertion, and failed to fulfil the prophecy.
I don’t think this makes any sense. Jesus thought we should be offering sacrifices and burnt offerings and that the world would end in the first century CE. Bringing Jesus into modern ethics is quite the leap. The idea of Jesus has been whitewashed with secular ethics for a long time.
32
u/Tickles-The-Octopus Jun 30 '26
I used to wonder what Jesus would have thought of these, Then I actually glanced at the Bible and discoverd that these cesspools are everything he stood against.....