• prole@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Nah, it’s situational. Parts are relevant when they need to be and irrelevant when they need to be. It’s convenient like that.

    • RegularGoose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Jesus and the teachings of christianity in any of its forms are irrelevant to a functional modern society. Anyone who uses any parts of the bible beyond a few cherry-picked, out of context, touchy-feely bits as a foundation for their morality is almost certain to be a worse person for it.

    • gowan@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      1 year ago

      That might be the most tone deaf understanding of Abrahamism I have seen that isn’t LDS or the Christian Identity movement.

      For fricks sake you don’t even have a Gospel there or any reason for any of this to be done. You at least need Genesis

      • eestileib@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh I went to a Christian school, read it all, did the textual analysis of the different pentateuch authors, that stuff.

        And what do Christians actually quote from all that? Shit from leviticus and romans about hating gay people. That’s what matters.

        And at weddings people read “love is kind…” before that Khalil Gibran poem about the temple columns.

        Truly, contemporary Christians are receiving their reward.

        • Zeppo@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          They do like Genesis too, as far as “original sin” meaning everyone is born doomed, and Eve meaning all women are bad.