Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Daily Beast)   It's what Jesus would do   (thedailybeast.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Ku Klux Klan, Nationalism, Christianity, United States, Evangelicalism, Christian nationalist, Christendom, Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene  
•       •       •

3876 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Aug 2022 at 9:35 AM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



52 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-08-09 8:27:12 AM  
I'm not sure that you understand What Republican Jesus Would Do then, Daily Beast. Republican Jesus will shoot them all and let his Father sort them out.
 
2022-08-09 8:32:59 AM  
Eight year olds?
 
2022-08-09 9:10:34 AM  
Jesus would wonder what all these goyim were doing, and what he had to do with any of it.
 
2022-08-09 9:24:39 AM  

Brawndo: Eight year olds?


turned off noscript to vote for this
 
2022-08-09 9:34:13 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 9:38:38 AM  
It's like proudly declaring you're a Nazi, except Jeebus invisibly is behind you holding the lighter for the cross burning you're going to do on someone's lawn.
 
2022-08-09 9:38:49 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 9:39:40 AM  
If your church has an ATM in the lobby, you're on par with the Wall Street idiots who were praying at the golden bull, for an impressive level of LITERALLY DOING IT WRONG.
 
2022-08-09 9:39:58 AM  
Not Republican Jesus.  He doesn't even understand what it means to turn the other cheek or love thy neighbor.
 
2022-08-09 9:40:44 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size


The young carpenter from Nazareth? I know him well. Promising young man. He died badly.
 
2022-08-09 9:42:34 AM  
No need to demonize wolves here.  Or sheep.

How about we just say she's a steaming pile of rancid assholes in a sheet?
 
2022-08-09 9:45:24 AM  
Since when do Republicans / Right-Wing Nut Jobs / Evangelicals do what Jesus would do subby? Everyone in the US should know by now that they follow JEEBUS not Jesus. That Jesus guy was durty soshulist hippie.
 
2022-08-09 9:46:39 AM  
They don't speak for American Christians. And it's up to us to finally deflate their claims of a monopoly and thus their hold on power, reclaim our religion and its prophetic voice for the Gospel's true values of love, dignity, equality, and social justice.

Yes, I'm sure that your opposition to the metastasis of Christian fanaticism in America over just the last 45 years failed so totally only because you weren't True of Heart. Maybe if you just believe harder this time, we'll finally be able to undo Reaganism and purge the Nazis from the pews.

// bad news, kiddo: they DO speak for you, loudly and consistently; and their monopoly is not just over the faith, but on one of America's political parties
// also, almost literally nobody (certainly the statistical "nobody") believes the Gospel's values are love, dignity, equality and social justice - your religion basically stands for division, conquest, hate, and supremacy, and your work should be focused on undoing THAT, so you'll first need to do decades of work just to bring it back to "benign"
// set achievable goals, my dude, THEN you can shoot the moon
 
MFK
2022-08-09 9:47:09 AM  
it's high time that as a society, we stop allowing these traitorous cowards to hide behind their religion as if that excuses everything.

The ONLY times these assholes ever invoke their "religious freedom" is when they want to discriminate against someone or not paying taxes for their megachurch grifts. Why do we allow it? It's not what's taught in their supposed "holy books" so why should we entertain this bullshiat as "religious beliefs." the Bible, for example, says fark all about abortion other than providing explicit instructions on how to perform one so why do we allow this oppression to ride under the cover of "religious beliefs?"
 
2022-08-09 9:48:21 AM  

Glorious Golden Ass: Not Republican Jesus.  He doesn't even understand what it means to turn the other cheek or love thy neighbor.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 9:53:25 AM  
"As a pastor, if there's one thing I understand"

...and that's that any Christians who embarass me or weigh the competing principles in the Bible and come to diffdrent conclusions than I do aren't true Scotsmen Christians, and therefore we never have to critically examine what it is that has caused Christianity to not play nice with other religions for 2000 years.
 
2022-08-09 9:53:55 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 9:54:31 AM  
Christian nationalism is an affront to the first amendment: even if it held that the amendment only applied at a federal level, they're still fomenting about removing that right at a certain level, which is subverting it federally, so no matter what, it's still very wrong.
 
2022-08-09 9:54:40 AM  
i1.wp.comView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 9:54:53 AM  

mrwhippy: [Fark user image image 480x480]


Please go read the story of Jesus and the Canaanite woman.
 
2022-08-09 9:57:26 AM  
There comes a time when you've said "this is not who we are" so many times that you should really just accept, yes, that's exactly who you are.
 
2022-08-09 9:58:28 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 9:59:10 AM  
What did Jesus explicitly command all y'all to do?
- Love God
- Love your neighbor
- Take care of the poor, sick, widows, orphans, and prisoners
- Welcome the stranger
- Don't hassle the foreigner
- Shut up and pay your damn taxes
 
MFK
2022-08-09 10:01:56 AM  

cabal_man: Christian nationalism is an affront to the first amendment: even if it held that the amendment only applied at a federal level, they're still fomenting about removing that right at a certain level, which is subverting it federally, so no matter what, it's still very wrong.


pretty sure you can go down the list and find that Republicans are an affront to every amendment. There's gotta be some violation of the "quartering troops" one but I'm too lazy to dig for it.

For a group that won't stfu about "teh constitushun!" they sure do seem to hate it.
 
2022-08-09 10:02:59 AM  
"Nationalist Christian".
 
2022-08-09 10:03:37 AM  

Markus5: What did Jesus explicitly command all y'all to do?
- Love God
- Love your neighbor
- Take care of the poor, sick, widows, orphans, and prisoners
- Welcome the stranger
- Don't hassle the foreigner
- Shut up and pay your damn taxes


Also:

- Seeing a woman and thinking she's hot damns your soul
- God won't forgive you if you don't forgive your rapist
- The only reason someone wouldn't believe in him is because they like being evil
 
2022-08-09 10:03:49 AM  
I prefer the name for them proposed by a Farker: "Nationalist Christians," or Nat-Cs.
 
2022-08-09 10:04:18 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 10:05:48 AM  
Jesus would be all for what they are doing. It's the Kingdom of Heaven, not the Democracy of Heaven. Combined with the First Commandment, it's clear that Jesus supported a model where people are forced to obey an authority they did not choose and if they stray from the one true religion, they are punished.

Which is exactly the Christian Nationalist position.
 
2022-08-09 10:14:43 AM  

GatorBreath: [Fark user image image 425x281]


white jesus ain't nothing to f$ck with
 
2022-08-09 10:20:16 AM  

Glorious Golden Ass: Not Republican Jesus.  He doesn't even understand what it means to turn the other cheek or love thy neighbor.


Republican Jesus is an eldritch abomination formed from aborted fetuses and AR-15 components.
 
2022-08-09 10:27:53 AM  
Jesus basically called for the separation of church and state and gave the go ahead for taxes, when He said, "Render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar.  Render unto God what belongs to God."  Someone point this out to someone like MTG.
 
2022-08-09 10:28:33 AM  

Chthonic Echoes: Glorious Golden Ass: Not Republican Jesus.  He doesn't even understand what it means to turn the other cheek or love thy neighbor.

Republican Jesus is an eldritch abomination formed from aborted fetuses and AR-15 components.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 10:51:38 AM  
Huh, been saying this since the 80's.  Welcome to the party pal!
 
2022-08-09 10:57:37 AM  
"Republicans like Marjorie Taylor Greene who wrap themselves in T-shirts proclaiming to be "proud Christian Nationalists" are really wolves in sheep's clothing. "

No they're not. They are doing exactly what that religion teaches.
 
2022-08-09 11:01:33 AM  
#NotallChristians
Any more I see two groups of Christians
One Group: Jesus hates ______
Second Group: Don't listen to them No Real Christian teaches Jesus Hates, and just ignore all the times Christians have done anything bad in the Name of Jesus, because they weren't True Scotsmen Christians, Jesus is the Prince of Peace*


*BTW didn't Jesus claim he came not to join together but to cause strife

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
 
2022-08-09 11:04:57 AM  
FYI:  if you don't want to be painted with the same brush as Christian Nationalists, maybe take care of your pedophile priest problem instead of sweeping it under the rug.
 
2022-08-09 11:09:28 AM  

SoupJohnB: I prefer the name for them proposed by a Farker: "Nationalist Christians," or Nat-Cs.

We need to make that trend. Anyone know any well-known influencers?

Which Farker came up with it?
 
2022-08-09 11:16:45 AM  

Martian_Astronomer: "As a pastor, if there's one thing I understand"

...and that's that any Christians who embarass me or weigh the competing principles in the Bible and come to diffdrent conclusions than I do aren't true Scotsmen Christians, and therefore we never have to critically examine what it is that has caused Christianity to not play nice with other religions for 2000 years.

spongeboob: #NotallChristians
Any more I see two groups of Christians
One Group: Jesus hates ______
Second Group: Don't listen to them No Real Christian teaches Jesus Hates, and just ignore all the times Christians have done anything bad in the Name of Jesus, because they weren't True Scotsmen Christians, Jesus is the Prince of Peace*

*BTW didn't Jesus claim he came not to join together but to cause strife

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

Before you throw the "No True Scotsman" fallacy around, you might want to read up on what it really is. It only applies when those claiming "No True (whatever)" are doing so based on a criterion or criteria that are not the defining criteria of the group.

"Christian" literally means "follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ." If someone claims to be a Christian and does not follow His teachings, it is not No True Scotsman to say that they're not true Christians. But if someone were to say that someone else isn't a "true Christian" because, say, they vote Democratic, that would be No True Scotsman.

It'd be like saying that someone isn't a true Farker because they never type "tl:dr" when someone else posts a long comment (proper example of the fallacy), vs. not being a true Farker because they don't have a Fark account (not the fallacy).
 
2022-08-09 11:18:30 AM  
Gaming religion, gaming democracy, gaming the courts, gaming education, gaming healthcare, gaming the tax system -- back in Jesus day it was just a wolf and some missing sheep and a gullible grandmother -- really not enough for a proper business model.
 
2022-08-09 11:31:21 AM  
Good job actually linking to her tweet hawking the shirts. farking imbecile.
 
2022-08-09 11:51:56 AM  

COMALite J: Martian_Astronomer: "As a pastor, if there's one thing I understand"

...and that's that any Christians who embarass me or weigh the competing principles in the Bible and come to diffdrent conclusions than I do aren't true Scotsmen Christians, and therefore we never have to critically examine what it is that has caused Christianity to not play nice with other religions for 2000 years.
spongeboob: #NotallChristians
Any more I see two groups of Christians
One Group: Jesus hates ______
Second Group: Don't listen to them No Real Christian teaches Jesus Hates, and just ignore all the times Christians have done anything bad in the Name of Jesus, because they weren't True Scotsmen Christians, Jesus is the Prince of Peace*

*BTW didn't Jesus claim he came not to join together but to cause strife

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
Before you throw the "No True Scotsman" fallacy around, you might want to read up on what it really is. It only applies when those claiming "No True (whatever)" are doing so based on a criterion or criteria that are not the defining criteria of the group.

"Christian" literally means "follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ." If someone claims to be a Christian and does not follow His teachings, it is not No True Scotsman to say that they're not true Christians. But if someone were to say that someone else isn't a "true Christian" because, say, they vote Democratic, that would be No True Scotsman.

It'd be like saying that someone isn't a true Farker because they never type "tl:dr" when someone else posts a long comment (proper example of the fallacy), vs. not being a true Farker because they don't have a Fark account (not the fallacy).


So you're saying that you are type two
 
2022-08-09 12:16:02 PM  
i.imgur.comView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 12:19:44 PM  

COMALite J: Martian_Astronomer: "As a pastor, if there's one thing I understand"

...and that's that any Christians who embarass me or weigh the competing principles in the Bible and come to diffdrent conclusions than I do aren't true Scotsmen Christians, and therefore we never have to critically examine what it is that has caused Christianity to not play nice with other religions for 2000 years.
spongeboob: #NotallChristians
Any more I see two groups of Christians
One Group: Jesus hates ______
Second Group: Don't listen to them No Real Christian teaches Jesus Hates, and just ignore all the times Christians have done anything bad in the Name of Jesus, because they weren't True Scotsmen Christians, Jesus is the Prince of Peace*

*BTW didn't Jesus claim he came not to join together but to cause strife

Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division:
52 For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.
Before you throw the "No True Scotsman" fallacy around, you might want to read up on what it really is. It only applies when those claiming "No True (whatever)" are doing so based on a criterion or criteria that are not the defining criteria of the group.

"Christian" literally means "follower of the teachings of Jesus Christ." If someone claims to be a Christian and does not follow His teachings, it is not No True Scotsman to say that they're not true Christians. But if someone were to say that someone else isn't a "true Christian" because, say, they vote Democratic, that would be No True Scotsman.

It'd be like saying that someone isn't a true Farker because they never type "tl:dr" when someone else posts a long comment (proper example of the fallacy), vs. not being a true Farker because they don't have a Fark account (not the fallacy).


The problem with this excuse is that the No True Scotsman fallacy is about using a personal definition of a class and every Christian uses a personal definition of what the "teachings of Jesus Christ" actually means.

I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery - Matthew 19:9

Would you consider any Protestant who supports divorce for other reasons, like when there's domestic violence, a Christian? The red text is pretty clear, this is a teaching of Jesus Christ. Is it not?  Yet I don't see most people claiming the Anglicans aren't Chrisitian because they allow remarriage even when there is no adultery.

Your explanation was just another No True Scotsman.  You basically said "No True Christian would interpret the teachings of Jesus in a way I don't agree with".
 
2022-08-09 12:27:13 PM  
Who cares what Jesus would do?


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 12:32:36 PM  

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs: The problem with this excuse is that the No True Scotsman fallacy is about using a personal definition of a class and every Christian uses a personal definition of what the "teachings of Jesus Christ" actually means.


Yep. I'm not able to type at length right now, so I'll just sign on to this. People us "the teachings of Jesus" as shorthand for very sectarian (or personal) interpretations of the New Testament, and arguing that modern nationalist Chistians are somehow abberant in a way that medieval catholics or seconds century saints aren't requires you to smuggle in a giant wall of fine print.
 
2022-08-09 12:43:43 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-08-09 12:45:49 PM  

Troy Aikman's Giant Thumbs: The problem with this excuse is that the No True Scotsman fallacy is about using a personal definition of a class and every Christian uses a personal definition of what the "teachings of Jesus Christ" actually means.

I tell you that anyone who divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery - Matthew 19:9

Would you consider any Protestant who supports divorce for other reasons, like when there's domestic violence, a Christian? The red text is pretty clear, this is a teaching of Jesus Christ. Is it not? Yet I don't see most people claiming the Anglicans aren't Chrisitian because they allow remarriage even when there is no adultery.

Your explanation was just another No True Scotsman. You basically said "No True Christian would interpret the teachings of Jesus in a way I don't agree with".

Martian_Astronomer: Yep. I'm not able to type at length right now, so I'll just sign on to this. People us "the teachings of Jesus" as shorthand for very sectarian (or personal) interpretations of the New Testament, and arguing that modern nationalist Chistians are somehow abberant in a way that medieval catholics or seconds century saints aren't requires you to smuggle in a giant wall of fine print.

I wasn't referring to any particular teachings of Christ. I was only talking about what the "No True Scotsman" fallacy is and is not. Nothing more than that.

In general, when a religion is named after a person, it's named after the person whom its followers hold to be the highest revealer of moral and ethical truths. So if someone holds the teachings of Confucius in that regard, they're Confuciain, and their religion is Confucianism. Buddha? Buddhist/Buddhism. Zoroaster? Zoroastrian(ism). Heck, we even used to call Islam "Mahometiansm" / "Mohammedanism" for similiar reasons.

What individuals or sects who claim Jesus as the ultimate revealer of moral and ethical truths believe He meant by His various teachings may differ, but if they claim Him as the ultimate authority in the current age, they're Christian.

The Dispensationalists, which is much of right-wing evangelicalism and Nationalist "Christianity," outright says that Paul is the Head of the Dispensation of Grace that we currently live in, so his teachings take precedence even over Christ's, even where salvation itself is on the line, for we who live in his Dispensation of Grace (aka the Church Age). They say that all you have to do to be saved is to accept Jesus Christ as Personal Savior, and anything you do, good or bad, has no bearing on that. That's based on things Paul wrote. Jesus said things like, "Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into My Kingdom, but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in Heaven."

So, by the above definition, they really aren't true Christians. They're Paulians. It's not No True Scotsman to say so. Same for any group that says that we're supposed to obey Paul (or whoever) over Jesus where the two disagree on something, especially with salvation itself on the line.
 
2022-08-09 1:20:19 PM  

COMALite J: The Dispensationalists, which is much of right-wing evangelicalism and Nationalist "Christianity," outright says that Paul is the Head of the Dispensation of Grace that that we're supposed to obey Paul


And again, citiation needed on that. I'm pretty familiar with dispensationalism, and that isn't what it teaches. Fundies in general teach that Jesus and Paul are in harmony, (and not just the fundies, either,) so if we want to get pedantic about definitions, the first things I'd ask are "Where did you get this?" and "Is this your editorialized version of what American fundagelicals believe?"
 
2022-08-09 2:34:52 PM  

COMALite J: I wasn't referring to any particular teachings of Christ. I was only talking about what the "No True Scotsman" fallacy is and is not. Nothing more than that.

In general, when a religion is named after a person, it's named after the person whom its followers hold to be the highest revealer of moral and ethical truths. So if someone holds the teachings of Confucius in that regard, they're Confuciain, and their religion is Confucianism. Buddha? Buddhist/Buddhism. Zoroaster? Zoroastrian(ism). Heck, we even used to call Islam "Mahometiansm" / "Mohammedanism" for similiar reasons.

What individuals or sects who claim Jesus as the ultimate revealer of moral and ethical truths believe He meant by His various teachings may differ, but if they claim Him as the ultimate authority in the current age, they're Christian.

The Dispensationalists, which is much of right-wing evangelicalism and Nationalist "Christianity," outright says that Paul is the Head of the Dispensation of Grace that we currently live in, so his teachings take precedence even over Christ's, even where salvation itself is on the line, for we who live in his Dispensation of Grace (aka the Church Age). They say that all you have to do to be saved is to accept Jesus Christ as Personal Savior, and anything you do, good or bad, has no bearing on that. That's based on things Paul wrote. Jesus said things like, "Not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into My Kingdom, but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in Heaven."

So, by the above definition, they really aren't true Christians. They're Paulians. It's not No True Scotsman to say so. Same for any group that says that we're supposed to obey Paul (or whoever) over Jesus where the two disagree on something, especially with salvation itself on the line.


Not sure I agree with yoour description of the Dispensation of Grace. It's been a few decades but from what I remember, the core of dispensationalism was that while the Gospels provided definitive knowledge, they did not provide exhaustive knowledge needed to obtain Grace. Jesus said what mankind needed to do but God revealed how to do it via the Pauline Epistles. In your example, there is no conflict because "doeth the will of My Father" means accepting Jesus by being a member of the Church which was revealed through Paul.

Both dispensationlists and congregationlists follow Jesus, they just disagree on where the authority to determine what that means lies. Which is pretty much the exact same as Islam. Both Sunni and Shia worship Mohammad, they just argue over who got to explain Mohammad's words to the rest of the world.

It still comes down to using a personal definition of the class. The Catholics definition of heresy meant no true Christian would preach against the Church. When Martin Luther was excommunicated, the Church said he wasn't a true Christian. But he was. Any objective definition of Christian in 1521 would have defined him as a Christian, any impartial observer would have classified Luther as Christian.

Just like now, any objective definition of Christian would include the American Evangelicals, no matter how much you want to excommunicate them.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.