Comment on Anon questions the KKK

• thespcicifcocean@lemmy.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  John Brown was a radical Christian, and he’s okay in my book.

  source

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Truly an American hero.

    source

    • nomy@lemmy.zip ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Pretty telling that he’s not mentioned in history books. I didn’t learn anything about him until well into adulthood.

      source

      • mergingapples@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        It’s always funny when I hear this, currently teaching ELA in Florida of all places. So, we all heard of the cuts to education, stop teaching certain bits of history (please fill me in on the correct term, I currently remember trump or Desantis’ buzzwords about not teaching slaves being enslaved and them being “indentured” and “learning valuable skills!” the cunt.)

        Anyway, our current section for this lesson plan is on Harriet Tubman, underground railroad, teaching the kids how to get characterization from the text and follow context clues, stuff like that. John Brown is mentioned, and in my counties’ plans is a side lesson on John Brown, what he did, which works better for me since I should be teaching history regardless. I’m telling these kids all about him, what he believes in, and how raiding that armory is what caused the federal government to come crashing down on him, all the crazy radical badass things this man did.

        Now, as I’m teaching these things, in the back of my head I’m thinking “This is surprising… Isn’t this supposed to be forbidden knowledge right know? What got cut?” Anyway, sorry for the walk of text. Slightly drunk, figured it fit here.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Same. The dude should have a statue in DC and probably a holiday.

        source

        • -> View More Comments
      • threshold_dweller@lemmy.today ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        I grew up in Appalachia and he was covered a bit, more than just mentioned.

        source
• Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I believe Jesus taught tolerance and love

  So that’s what he meant when he said

  34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. Matthew 10:34-36

  or when he said:

  “Whoever is not with me is against me, and whoever does not gather with me scatters." Matthew 12:30

  So tolerant and loving! 😍

  source

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Matthew 10:34-36

    Look at Matthew 26 (specifically 52) where Jesus stopped Peter from defending him with his sword. Jesus is opposed to violence, full stop.

    The sword Jesus spoke of in Matthew 10 wasn’t a literal sword. He’s saying he’s here to disrupt the status quo. Following him requires being at odds with the status quo (Jewish law), which is likely to result in being excluded from families and whatnot. He certainly doesn’t condone violence, but he does acknowledge that this is a fork in the road and people need to pick sides, because they can’t do both.

    This similar idea is conveyed in Matthew 6:24 (replace “money” with anything else that stands between you and following God):

    No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve both God and money.

    Or Matthew 5:29:

    If your right eye causes you to stumble, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.

    I also don’t think he means you need to preemptively abandon your family, just that if you have to choose, choose God.

    The same idea is true in secular ideology as well. If your family are Nazis, it’s better to leave them than become a Nazi.

    source

    • Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      It’s so weird how Trump and Jesus fans always need to explain what the words their admiration spoke actually meant. He maybe the evangelicals had it right all along and Donnie is the second coming!

      source

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨17⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Maybe. But I wouldn’t know because I never voted for that idiot and I think evangelicals are almost always wrong.

        All I did here was read the larger context. Jesus was known for relying heavily on symbolism, so if something doesn’t fit the rest of the message, it means I’m likely missing something important in the symbolism. That’s why I provided additional examples to show my thought process.

        If Jesus wanted to start a literal war, why didn’t his disciples gather an army? Because they understood his meaning.

        source
  • algorithmae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨13⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Oh come on, I can see from a mile away that’s it’s a metaphor

    source

    • Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.org ⁨12⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Sure like everything that is uncomfortable. Rest is literal. How convenient.

      source

      • algorithmae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Now you’re putting words in my mouth. You’re arguing against the wrong person dude, chill

        source
    • Lightor@lemmy.world ⁨10⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      How can you tell the difference between what should be interpreted as literal vs a metaphor?

      source

      • algorithmae@lemmy.sdf.org ⁨7⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        Because 35-36 explains the metaphor in 34

        source
  • angrystego@lemmy.world ⁨11⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    They said they believe Jesus taught tolerance. They didn’t say it’s the ultimate fact just that they believe it. Of course you can find anything in the Bible. You can interpret the text in a hundred ways. There’s no one true interpretation. You can just choose one to believe in that makes sense to you (or decide non of it is for you). I think sugar_in_your_tea has chosen a very positive interpretation.

    Btw I love your user name!

    source
  • dragonfucker@lemmy.nz ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Based tbh

    source
  • nutsack@lemmy.world ⁨14⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    i fucked god’s asshole

    source
• bhamlin@lemmy.world ⁨20⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  I feel like “tolerance” is the wrong word here. If you instead strive for “compassion” you’d be closer to the mark.

  source

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    When I think of tolerance, I think of how Jesus dealt with sinners. He didn’t go around pointing out others’ mistakes, instead he helped any who came to him. He even asked his father to forgive the people that killed him, saying they didn’t know what they were doing.

    To me, tolerance doesn’t mean ignoring people who live differently, it means quite the opposite: look past the sin and love people for the rest of who they are. Getting into compassion, that also means championing causes that you disagree with, but that help your sinner friends and don’t hurt you.

    For example, I fully support legalizing the following:

    • gay marriage - I’ll even include polyamorous marriage (assuming consent)
    • drugs - any restrictions should merely protect those who don’t use it (e.g. BAC limits for driving)
    • prostitution
    • gambling

    I’m morally opposed to each of those, but that only applies to my own actions, and others choosing to do those doesn’t hurt me. If someone else makes a different decision, that’s not my business and I’ll continue loving them for who they are. Banning those things causes harm, and legalizing them makes people happy without hurting me, so why should I oppose?

    Likewise, a homeless person addicted to drugs isn’t any less deserving of love than my local religious leader. Jesus gave two commandments:

    1. Love God
    2. Love neighbor as yourself

    He didn’t say, “love saints more than sinners,” in fact he said we shouldn’t judge others at all. So if I love my religious leader and not the homeless person, I need to repent. And I show that love through action (i.e. compassion), otherwise it’s just lip-service and I’m no better than the Pharisees that showed piety in public but were incredibly intolerant.

    Tolerance without commission isn’t love just like faith without works is dead.

    source

    • bhamlin@lemmy.world ⁨19⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Sure, but also “love the sinner, hate the sin.” Compassion still feels more appropriate.

      source

      • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

        True. I just want to point out that isn’t a quote from the Bible though, it’s from Saint Augustine.

        Compassion is also appropriate, but it’s also has the ugly connotation of looking down on others, as in people looking for problems to solve instead of unconditionally loving others around them.

        People don’t want to be a project, they want to be loved and accepted. So don’t help someone because they’re a project, help because you love them and you helping is what they want (not what you think is good for them).

        source

        • -> View More Comments
• blindbunny@lemmy.ml ⁨9⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Love is a verb

  source

  • RavingGrob@lemm.ee ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/love

    source

    • blindbunny@lemmy.ml ⁨4⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

      Yep the second part in the link you sent. But it appears as if some people don’t think love is something you have to do. I guess it just happens 🤦‍♂️

      source
• the_crotch@sh.itjust.works ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Tolerantly beat the fuck out of those money changers

  source

  • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works ⁨18⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Lol.

    The problem there was that they were defiling his house, disturbing people who were there to worship. Tolerance doesn’t mean putting up with bad actors, it means not getting involved in things that don’t concern you. Someone else choosing a different religion or lifestyle doesn’t concern you, and the direction to love them still applies.

    source