this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2023
729 points (96.7% liked)

politics

18750 readers
4490 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Texas State Rep. James Talarico using biblical scripture to tear down conservative Christian arguments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IchNichtenLichten 0 points 9 months ago (2 children)

More knowledge is always a good thing but religious texts can and are twisted to suit an agenda all the time. We can't go back and ask the authors for clarification so we're left arguing about what a person believes the text means.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 9 months ago (1 children)

That just leads to another debate of who wrote the damn thing.

Hint: It wasn't God or Jesus, but it won't stop them from guessing those two first.

[–] IchNichtenLichten 11 points 9 months ago

The earliest text in the New Testament was written around 50 years after Christ's death. There's no definitive account of his life because the accounts in the gospels are sometimes contradictory. It's messy, almost like it was written by a bunch of people recounting stories they heard rather than it being the literal word of God.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 9 months ago (1 children)

But they (the right) usually quote it by removing all context and by only using snippets of the text so there's no interpretation required, in which case it's very easy to retort by using the same tactic or by quoting the whole passage.

Heck, just telling them that "it's written all over the place in the Bible that only God has the ability to judge" takes care of most of their message.

[–] IchNichtenLichten 1 points 9 months ago

True, but if you bring facts, logic, and citations to a discussion about belief and faith then all it takes is, "that's not the interpretation I choose to believe" to end the conversation.