Or so says Leumas:
-What lesson would one learn from him cursing a Fig Tree for not having fruits OUT OF SEASON? That he is a moron? That he is a DESPOT? That people should give what they cannot give? That people are expected to do what they cannot do? How wise is that?
-Jesus being such a servile coward with the Roman Centurion.
-Being such a vile abuser and humiliator of the poor Phoenician woman.
-Being racist and calling gentiles Dogs
-Telling people not to worry about the future and not to work because they will be provided for by some imaginary sky daddy.
-Denying his family.
-Verbally abusing his mother.
-Verbally abusing his mother and father at the age of 12
-Going around performing magic tricks to bamboozle people into believing that he is god.
-Conspiring with his friend Lazarus to pretend to be dead so that he can pretend to raise him from the dead in order to huckster people.
-Making people believe in demonic possession and exorcisms
-Making people believe that infirmity and diseases and illness are due to sins
-Telling a man that he has to leave his dead father without a burial.
-Telling a man that he needs to give away all his possessions and go around begging
-Telling people that they do not need to wash their hands before eating
-Telling people that what they ingest does not harm them
-Telling people that they need to gouge out their eyes and cut off their hands.....even if that is metaphorical it means to shun and ostracize people.
-Telling people that they cannot divorce
-Telling people that looking at women is a sin
-Deceiving people that the end of the world is neigh
-Telling people that they should hate their family for his sake
-Telling people that familial strife is what he wants them to do....but not a bad -idea I think
-Going around insulting the Jews
-Telling people that slaves are lower than the masters
-Telling people to bring people and kill them under his feet for not agreeing
with him
-Telling people that prayer works
-Telling people that if they do not agree with him they are worthless and will be tortured for ever
-Telling people that they cannot build on sand when all they have over there is sand... ok this one is just a joke....but seriously...he did not know about raft foundations or piles?
Now, I'm just an agnostic who went to Sunday School eons ago, and have no real desire to be an apologetic, but I will steadfastly maintain that the above is a series of half-truths, statements taken out of context, misrepresentations, and lies (false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive)
It would take weeks for me to respond to every point above, so ill start one by one from the top and take it from there.
1) The fig tree parable. According to the apologetics (see eg: http://ift.tt/1lnH3TT
the tree is a metaphor for the Jewish nation. Personally, when I first heard the story years ago, I just took it as Jesus demonstrating his dominance over the natural. It was an odd story, for sure, but to read into it the idea of despotism or moronic behavior is a huge stretch IMO
2) There's no reference, so presumably this refers to the 'Cutting off the ear' episode?? (im just guessing) If so, I never took it as a sign of cowardice. Given that it involves someone who supposedly is accepting their crucifixion for the 'greater good' that seems more brave than cowardly to me. It is also fully consistent with the general Christian message to 'love your enemy' and 'turn the other cheek'. If one understands this fundamental message than in context calling Jesus' actions towards the Centurion 'cowardly' is a huge stretch IMO.
3) Stating to the Phoenician woman:
" “Let the children be filled first, for it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs." Mark 7:25-30
How this can be construed as being a "vile abuser and humiliator" is beyond me, unless one is filled with vitriolic hatred of all things Chrisitian, but here is the apologetic interpretation:
http://ift.tt/1dC9RaQ
which points out that 'dog' in the context of the story is hardly insulting, and that the story relates to Jesus' primary mission being to the Jews.
Personally, I never gave the statement much thought; it didn't seem particularly strong one way or the other. The bottom line in the episode is that Jesus expelling a demon from the woman's daughter. If he were truly a 'vile abuser' as Leumas asserts, then why did he grant the wishes of the woman? Makes no sense at all, unless you have a vitriolic hatred of all things Christian.
4) No evidence is given as to 'racism' so I can't comment
5) Jesus never said that so again I can't comment. Presumably Leumas is just paraphrasing a statement, but by adding his own terms like "imaginary sky fairy" it just gets lost in his own personal biases against believers.
6) 'Denying his family' no reference, presumably Mark 3:31? At any rate, it is consistent with his behavior as a 12 year old in (7) and (8) "verbally abusing his parents" Here's one apologetic interpretation:
http://ift.tt/1dC9RaS
Personally, I would probably agree with the idea that 'leaving family to follow the leader' is a bit cult-like. However, to characterize Jesus' statements to his parents as 'abusive' is a huge stretch IMO. Where is the 'abuse'?
I'm running short on time, so for now i'll skip to one of my favorites on the list (cause it bugged me as a church-going adolescent) "telling people that looking at a woman is a sin" No matter what source, this is an outright lie, since the phrase is:
"Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" Matthew 5:2728
Here is the apologetic response:
http://ift.tt/1dC9U6g
The bottom line is that Leumas definitely knows the various translations, but he purposely leaves out the "lust" part and everything that goes with it eg. adultery, "coveting the wife" because he wants to present Jesus in as unkind a light as he can--it is a deliberate misrepresentation, otherwise known as a lie.
-What lesson would one learn from him cursing a Fig Tree for not having fruits OUT OF SEASON? That he is a moron? That he is a DESPOT? That people should give what they cannot give? That people are expected to do what they cannot do? How wise is that?
-Jesus being such a servile coward with the Roman Centurion.
-Being such a vile abuser and humiliator of the poor Phoenician woman.
-Being racist and calling gentiles Dogs
-Telling people not to worry about the future and not to work because they will be provided for by some imaginary sky daddy.
-Denying his family.
-Verbally abusing his mother.
-Verbally abusing his mother and father at the age of 12
-Going around performing magic tricks to bamboozle people into believing that he is god.
-Conspiring with his friend Lazarus to pretend to be dead so that he can pretend to raise him from the dead in order to huckster people.
-Making people believe in demonic possession and exorcisms
-Making people believe that infirmity and diseases and illness are due to sins
-Telling a man that he has to leave his dead father without a burial.
-Telling a man that he needs to give away all his possessions and go around begging
-Telling people that they do not need to wash their hands before eating
-Telling people that what they ingest does not harm them
-Telling people that they need to gouge out their eyes and cut off their hands.....even if that is metaphorical it means to shun and ostracize people.
-Telling people that they cannot divorce
-Telling people that looking at women is a sin
-Deceiving people that the end of the world is neigh
-Telling people that they should hate their family for his sake
-Telling people that familial strife is what he wants them to do....but not a bad -idea I think
-Going around insulting the Jews
-Telling people that slaves are lower than the masters
-Telling people to bring people and kill them under his feet for not agreeing
with him
-Telling people that prayer works
-Telling people that if they do not agree with him they are worthless and will be tortured for ever
-Telling people that they cannot build on sand when all they have over there is sand... ok this one is just a joke....but seriously...he did not know about raft foundations or piles?
Now, I'm just an agnostic who went to Sunday School eons ago, and have no real desire to be an apologetic, but I will steadfastly maintain that the above is a series of half-truths, statements taken out of context, misrepresentations, and lies (false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive)
It would take weeks for me to respond to every point above, so ill start one by one from the top and take it from there.
1) The fig tree parable. According to the apologetics (see eg: http://ift.tt/1lnH3TT
the tree is a metaphor for the Jewish nation. Personally, when I first heard the story years ago, I just took it as Jesus demonstrating his dominance over the natural. It was an odd story, for sure, but to read into it the idea of despotism or moronic behavior is a huge stretch IMO
2) There's no reference, so presumably this refers to the 'Cutting off the ear' episode?? (im just guessing) If so, I never took it as a sign of cowardice. Given that it involves someone who supposedly is accepting their crucifixion for the 'greater good' that seems more brave than cowardly to me. It is also fully consistent with the general Christian message to 'love your enemy' and 'turn the other cheek'. If one understands this fundamental message than in context calling Jesus' actions towards the Centurion 'cowardly' is a huge stretch IMO.
3) Stating to the Phoenician woman:
" “Let the children be filled first, for it is not good to take the children’s bread and throw it to the little dogs." Mark 7:25-30
How this can be construed as being a "vile abuser and humiliator" is beyond me, unless one is filled with vitriolic hatred of all things Chrisitian, but here is the apologetic interpretation:
http://ift.tt/1dC9RaQ
which points out that 'dog' in the context of the story is hardly insulting, and that the story relates to Jesus' primary mission being to the Jews.
Personally, I never gave the statement much thought; it didn't seem particularly strong one way or the other. The bottom line in the episode is that Jesus expelling a demon from the woman's daughter. If he were truly a 'vile abuser' as Leumas asserts, then why did he grant the wishes of the woman? Makes no sense at all, unless you have a vitriolic hatred of all things Christian.
4) No evidence is given as to 'racism' so I can't comment
5) Jesus never said that so again I can't comment. Presumably Leumas is just paraphrasing a statement, but by adding his own terms like "imaginary sky fairy" it just gets lost in his own personal biases against believers.
6) 'Denying his family' no reference, presumably Mark 3:31? At any rate, it is consistent with his behavior as a 12 year old in (7) and (8) "verbally abusing his parents" Here's one apologetic interpretation:
http://ift.tt/1dC9RaS
Personally, I would probably agree with the idea that 'leaving family to follow the leader' is a bit cult-like. However, to characterize Jesus' statements to his parents as 'abusive' is a huge stretch IMO. Where is the 'abuse'?
I'm running short on time, so for now i'll skip to one of my favorites on the list (cause it bugged me as a church-going adolescent) "telling people that looking at a woman is a sin" No matter what source, this is an outright lie, since the phrase is:
"Do not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" Matthew 5:2728
Here is the apologetic response:
http://ift.tt/1dC9U6g
The bottom line is that Leumas definitely knows the various translations, but he purposely leaves out the "lust" part and everything that goes with it eg. adultery, "coveting the wife" because he wants to present Jesus in as unkind a light as he can--it is a deliberate misrepresentation, otherwise known as a lie.
via International Skeptics Forum http://ift.tt/1co5fDB
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire