Topic: Matthew 25:40
Anonymous A started this discussion 3 years ago #107,625
And the king will answer them, ‘Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these who are members of my family, you did it to me.’
The least of these are a group that gets looked down upon by society and the majority population in such society. This includes such marginalized groups like black Americans, LGBTQ+ individuals, people who struggle with mental illness/disabilities, people struggling with substance abuse, the homeless, refugees, foreign immigrants, and any other minority group. Please remember that when you treat these people like shit. Jesus stands with those who are oppressed.
Matt "The Shagger" Hancock joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 15 minutes later[^] [v] #1,209,037
@OPenis
There were no black Americans or LGBTQ+ individuals at the time the Book of Matthew was written. Also, Jesus isn't real. Thanks.
There were no black Americans or LGBTQ+ individuals at the time the Book of Matthew was written. Also, Jesus isn't real. Thanks.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 37 minutes later, 52 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,038
Matt "The Shagger" Hancock replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 55 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,039
Anonymous C replied with this 3 years ago, 54 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,040
@previous (Matt "The Shagger" Hancock)
So you can't prove the unsolicited statement that you made. Ok thanks, that'll be all.
So you can't prove the unsolicited statement that you made. Ok thanks, that'll be all.
Matt "The Shagger" Hancock replied with this 3 years ago, 19 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,041
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,044
The Shagger is a retard.
Matt "The Shagger" Hancock replied with this 3 years ago, 17 minutes later, 3 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,048
horny wolfman joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 3 hours later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,068
@OP Whom?
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 15 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,070
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,071
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 14 minutes later, 7 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,073
@previous (F)
Well for one, it happened enough that they had to tell people to stop doing it in the Bible
Also in the Bible, there was a while town known for people who were lbgt and it was notorious
Well for one, it happened enough that they had to tell people to stop doing it in the Bible
Also in the Bible, there was a while town known for people who were lbgt and it was notorious
Matt "The Shagger" Hancock replied with this 3 years ago, 52 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,086
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 5 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,088
@previous (Matt "The Shagger" Hancock)
What? It absolutely mentions gay sex and a whole town of sodomites
What? It absolutely mentions gay sex and a whole town of sodomites
Anonymous F replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,090
@1,209,073 (E)
Was it written before they rewrote the Bible to say so?
Please show me where in the old or new testament it says so, not in the updated version.
Was it written before they rewrote the Bible to say so?
Please show me where in the old or new testament it says so, not in the updated version.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,091
@previous (F)
I don't read Hebrew or Greek. But it definitely talks about men not laying down with men
And also a city of men who were so wicked that they'd rather rape angels instead of women
Also the Bible has been re written so many times that you're unlikely to ever get a "factual "version"
But to make a claim that gay people didn't exist during the time is bizarre. Greeks were fucking each other like anus was going out of style
I don't read Hebrew or Greek. But it definitely talks about men not laying down with men
And also a city of men who were so wicked that they'd rather rape angels instead of women
Also the Bible has been re written so many times that you're unlikely to ever get a "factual "version"
But to make a claim that gay people didn't exist during the time is bizarre. Greeks were fucking each other like anus was going out of style
(Edited 19 seconds later.)
boof joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 11 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,092
Sparta especially
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 14 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,093
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,094
@previous (H)
Yes I know
But unless you know Hebrew or Greek, can you really be sure that what you're reading is accurate?
I mean saying rewrote seems to lead to that imo
Yes I know
But unless you know Hebrew or Greek, can you really be sure that what you're reading is accurate?
I mean saying rewrote seems to lead to that imo
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,095
@previous (E)
How do you know any of it is accurate to begin with? Even if you belieb this nonsense, that "word of god" went through men. Men are notorious for changing things in their favor.
How do you know any of it is accurate to begin with? Even if you belieb this nonsense, that "word of god" went through men. Men are notorious for changing things in their favor.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,096
@previous (H)
Yes I agree
But someone referencing something a long time ago, means that the concept was known about
Unless you believe that the people who wrote the Bible came up with the idea of fucking dudes so they could make a rule about it
Yes I agree
But someone referencing something a long time ago, means that the concept was known about
Unless you believe that the people who wrote the Bible came up with the idea of fucking dudes so they could make a rule about it
Toilet Seat !tr.t4dJfuU replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,099
@previous (E)
> But someone referencing something a long time ago, means that the concept was known about
So I could add shit to the bible and reference some made up shit, and since it's in the Bible, means it really happened?
> But someone referencing something a long time ago, means that the concept was known about
So I could add shit to the bible and reference some made up shit, and since it's in the Bible, means it really happened?
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,100
@previous (Toilet Seat !tr.t4dJfuU)
Well? I think if a document of a dude fucking a dude existed, than at least one person thought about it. Which probably means that the guy who wrote is was bicurious at the least
Well? I think if a document of a dude fucking a dude existed, than at least one person thought about it. Which probably means that the guy who wrote is was bicurious at the least
(Edited 8 seconds later.)
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 9 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,101
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,102
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 5 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,103
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 52 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,104
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 12 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,105
Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,106
@1,209,094 (E)
> But unless you know Hebrew or Greek, can you really be sure that what you're reading is accurate?
Even the Hebrew and Greek versions aren't some perfect, unchanged thing, you know. The ancient scribes who passed the manuscripts on over time edited them quite a lot.
There's a scholar I read about who sums it up best, I think. He was a born-again Christian, but studying the Bible's origins in-depth made him reconsider:
> I did my very best to hold on to my faith that the Bible was the inspired word of God with no mistakes and that lasted for about two years [...] I realized that at the time we had over 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament, and no two of them are exactly alike. The scribes were changing them, sometimes in big ways, but lots of times in little ways. And it finally occurred to me that if I really thought that God had inspired this text [...] If he went to the trouble of inspiring the text, why didn't he go to the trouble of preserving the text? Why did he allow scribes to change it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman
> But unless you know Hebrew or Greek, can you really be sure that what you're reading is accurate?
Even the Hebrew and Greek versions aren't some perfect, unchanged thing, you know. The ancient scribes who passed the manuscripts on over time edited them quite a lot.
There's a scholar I read about who sums it up best, I think. He was a born-again Christian, but studying the Bible's origins in-depth made him reconsider:
> I did my very best to hold on to my faith that the Bible was the inspired word of God with no mistakes and that lasted for about two years [...] I realized that at the time we had over 5,000 manuscripts of the New Testament, and no two of them are exactly alike. The scribes were changing them, sometimes in big ways, but lots of times in little ways. And it finally occurred to me that if I really thought that God had inspired this text [...] If he went to the trouble of inspiring the text, why didn't he go to the trouble of preserving the text? Why did he allow scribes to change it?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bart_D._Ehrman
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,109
Anonymous E double-posted this 3 years ago, 34 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,111
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,113
@previous (E)
Right. I'm the autistic one. Tell us, how did that interview with Taco Bell go?
Right. I'm the autistic one. Tell us, how did that interview with Taco Bell go?
(Edited 7 seconds later.)
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,115
@1,209,106 (Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE)
Ehrman wrote a good book on the historicity of Jesus called Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth
“he aims to state why all experts in the area agree that "whatever else you may think about Jesus, he certainly did exist."[1][2]“
Ehrman wrote a good book on the historicity of Jesus called Did Jesus Exist? The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth
“he aims to state why all experts in the area agree that "whatever else you may think about Jesus, he certainly did exist."[1][2]“
Anonymous I replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,117
@1,209,111 (E)
TN LABORATORY LEARNS GENETIC AUTISTIC MARKERS. NOW THE AUTISTIC HORDE CAN BE ABORTED!!!
TN LABORATORY LEARNS GENETIC AUTISTIC MARKERS. NOW THE AUTISTIC HORDE CAN BE ABORTED!!!
(Edited 49 seconds later.)
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,123
Anonymous E double-posted this 3 years ago, 18 seconds later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,124
Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE replied with this 3 years ago, 13 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,125
@1,209,106 (Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE)
It's pretty interesting, actually. Obviously in ancient times far fewer people were literate and read books, and they had to rely on scribes writing out texts again to preserve them. So it was quite possible for a transcriber with an agenda to add stuff in if he wanted to. I've read a few ancient Roman texts now where a later writer had added something in. Sometimes it's very hamfisted and obvious, but sometimes they manage to be a bit more subtle about it, and modern historians can only suspect that something might be a later addition.
So, like, I would expect that to apply very strongly in a large manuscript about religion, which is extremely controversial. It could be the Bible that came down to us in the present day is extremely different to its original form. It would be fascinating to know exactly how different, but we never will...
@1,209,109 (E)
Okay... So my point is, even knowing Koine Greek or Hebrew doesn't really help.
@1,209,115 (K)
I skim read the Wikipedia article, and him using the criterion of embarrassment is a small red flag for me. It isn't a sound argument, IMO. Lots of mythology makes its Gods and Goddesses look bad, but nobody tries to apply it to them. Like, Zeus regularly cheated on his wife to rape innocent women, he did several dumb and immoral things in the myths, but he was still very popular and worshipped as the head of the Graeco-Roman pantheon. Him being fallible doesn't mean that he existed. Sometimes humans like to write their gods with flaws.
I know he's a smart guy and I'm sure he studied a lot of relevant ancient texts for that book, I'm just not onboard with one of his main lines of reasoning.
I'd really love to read an academic book that tries to extract real historical events from the Bible, but I think it could be challenging to find an author who is objective enough and doesn't fall into traps like the above.
It's pretty interesting, actually. Obviously in ancient times far fewer people were literate and read books, and they had to rely on scribes writing out texts again to preserve them. So it was quite possible for a transcriber with an agenda to add stuff in if he wanted to. I've read a few ancient Roman texts now where a later writer had added something in. Sometimes it's very hamfisted and obvious, but sometimes they manage to be a bit more subtle about it, and modern historians can only suspect that something might be a later addition.
So, like, I would expect that to apply very strongly in a large manuscript about religion, which is extremely controversial. It could be the Bible that came down to us in the present day is extremely different to its original form. It would be fascinating to know exactly how different, but we never will...
@1,209,109 (E)
Okay... So my point is, even knowing Koine Greek or Hebrew doesn't really help.
@1,209,115 (K)
I skim read the Wikipedia article, and him using the criterion of embarrassment is a small red flag for me. It isn't a sound argument, IMO. Lots of mythology makes its Gods and Goddesses look bad, but nobody tries to apply it to them. Like, Zeus regularly cheated on his wife to rape innocent women, he did several dumb and immoral things in the myths, but he was still very popular and worshipped as the head of the Graeco-Roman pantheon. Him being fallible doesn't mean that he existed. Sometimes humans like to write their gods with flaws.
I know he's a smart guy and I'm sure he studied a lot of relevant ancient texts for that book, I'm just not onboard with one of his main lines of reasoning.
I'd really love to read an academic book that tries to extract real historical events from the Bible, but I think it could be challenging to find an author who is objective enough and doesn't fall into traps like the above.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 10 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,126
@previous (Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE)
Wait though, it's the best bet to get the most accurate info
What other way would suffice?
Wait though, it's the best bet to get the most accurate info
What other way would suffice?
(Edited 12 seconds later.)
Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE replied with this 3 years ago, 19 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,128
@previous (E)
Well... I see where you're coming from, but I'm saying that even those versions were changed a lot, so you're not necessarily getting any closer to some one correct version by analysing them.
Well... I see where you're coming from, but I'm saying that even those versions were changed a lot, so you're not necessarily getting any closer to some one correct version by analysing them.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 13 minutes later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,129
@previous (Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE)
There's no way of knowing
But if historical documentation is. A game of telephone, you want to get one of the first calls
There's no way of knowing
But if historical documentation is. A game of telephone, you want to get one of the first calls
Anonymous L joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 50 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,134
@1,209,125 (Killer Lettuce🌹 !HonkUK.BIE)
> I skim read the Wikipedia article, and him using the criterion of embarrassment is a small red flag for me. It isn't a sound argument,
Yes, it is.
> I skim read the Wikipedia article, and him using the criterion of embarrassment is a small red flag for me. It isn't a sound argument,
Yes, it is.
Lady D !Pool..v42s joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 36 minutes later, 12 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,135
@1,209,071 (F)
There was some article about the bones of some shaman who's pelvis was shaped like a males but had damage consistent with horseback riding.
There was some article about the bones of some shaman who's pelvis was shaped like a males but had damage consistent with horseback riding.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 41 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,142
@1,209,088 (E)
It is a pedophile verse, it was later changed to make homosexuals the abomination. Just another example of pedophiles abusing their powers to escape the consequences.
It is a pedophile verse, it was later changed to make homosexuals the abomination. Just another example of pedophiles abusing their powers to escape the consequences.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 13 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,144
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,150
@previous (E)
There were manuscripts found that had a word which referred to child molesters. And you asking why means you're a child abuse fetishist.
There were manuscripts found that had a word which referred to child molesters. And you asking why means you're a child abuse fetishist.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 56 seconds later, 13 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,151
horny wolfman replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,152
Silent Hero !ANHeroqgSY (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,153
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,154
Silent Hero !ANHeroqgSY (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 6 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,167
@previous (E)The reason women fear men is based on toxic societal expectations set for men and the few weak men who become susceptible to such.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 4 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,168
@previous (Silent Hero !ANHeroqgSY)
No it's because men like you are fucking disgusting. Hope you don't rape anyone
No it's because men like you are fucking disgusting. Hope you don't rape anyone
Anonymous L replied with this 3 years ago, 3 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,171
Hold up. Does anyone else think Anonymous E sounds like a creep, rapist, and pedophile?
Just thought we should address the large, pedophilic elephant in the room here.
Just thought we should address the large, pedophilic elephant in the room here.
Silent Hero !ANHeroqgSY (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 54 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,172
@1,209,168 (E)I am not a nonce and I understand the importance of consent.
Now I hope you have wonderful day.
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,173
@1,209,171 (L)
It's not pedophilic to day, show me a source on that
It is pedophilic to immediately think upon raping kids when someone asks for a source
It's not pedophilic to day, show me a source on that
It is pedophilic to immediately think upon raping kids when someone asks for a source
Anonymous E double-posted this 3 years ago, 17 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,174
Silent Hero !ANHeroqgSY (OP) replied with this 3 years ago, 8 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,177
@1,209,173 (E)I have not requested any source for perversive material.
Are you confessing to something, Anonymous E?
Anonymous L replied with this 3 years ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,178
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 7 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,180
@1,209,177 (Silent Hero !ANHeroqgSY)
I requested a source for your claim about the Bible. You're so fucking retarded Catherine
I requested a source for your claim about the Bible. You're so fucking retarded Catherine
Anonymous E double-posted this 3 years ago, 15 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,181
Fake anon !ZkUt8arUCU joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 9 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,183
Anonymous O joined in and replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 15 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,210
catherine is a faggot lmao
Anonymous H replied with this 3 years ago, 1 hour later, 17 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,221
Anonymous E replied with this 3 years ago, 23 hours later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,209,408
Catherine, why do you even care about what the Bible says about gay people?