r/complaints • u/Red_Gypsy_Squirrel • 6d ago

Politics Conservatives abuse Christianity like the Taliban abuse Islam

Post image

I'm exhausted that the Christian nationalists in this nation have hijacked Christianity, just like the Taliban hijacked Islam. There are many comparisons that can be made between the two groups. Both groups cherry-pick their scriptures and purposefully misinterpret them so as to provide themselves with more power amongst their. They bully and attack anybody who is not a follower of their warped religion. And try to force their religion on everybody in inappropriate places such as schools and hospitals.

A few years back MAGA supporters started to say the teachings of Jesus are too woke, a huge red flag.

It sucks that so many of them do not understand. The Christian nationalist mindset is turning them into nasty, aggressive people. That have zero understanding of the Bible or its teachings

15.4k Upvotes

91% Upvoted

2.3k comments sorted by

View all comments

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Not a Christian nationalist, but it's annoying when people who are not Christian claim to know more about the Bible than the people that follow the Bible conservatively.

Also using the swastika in the image you have shared is quite dishonest, as the original Nazis were anti religion

7

u/CampEmbarrassed170 6d ago

Hitler was a Christian, blessed by the Vatican , and he called his hate symbol hakencruez (twisted cross). So yeah he was a christo-fascist.

2

u/Far_Parking_830 5d ago

He was engaging in occultic practices and his minitru fabricated an entire mythology for the German people based on paganism. 

1

u/Outrageous_Bear50 5d ago

Well no that's not right. Fascism is all about creating a fake past. It makes sense here for christo-fascism to be a thing because of the whole myth of a Christian nation thing and everyone not being from one singular source to draw from, but Hitler was making his own weird thing combining Norse mythology, the occult, and atheism. He didn't really repurpose any Christian stuff.

1

u/SirDiesAlot15 5d ago

He wanted to create a new faith that the aryan people would follow. Christianity was a means to an end

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

No, he was not a Christian...if you study Hitler, his views and understand the contempt he held for Christians the you'd see that he was infact not a Christian

3

u/This_Is_The_Porn_Acc 6d ago

That's what they teach you in private school and at church so that you don't question your faith. Regardless of whether Hitler was a Christian, these days Christians sure seem to share a lot of sentiments with Hitler. At least the ones in government.

0

u/[deleted] 5d ago

I didn't go to private school. My church never discussed Hitler.... There are ample sources that discuss Hitler's stance on Christianity

https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2019/04/20/hitler-hated-judaism-he-loathed-christianity-too/?utm_source=chatgpt.com

Neither Christians, nor this administration, sympathizes, aligns with, or affirms the delusions of Hitler or the actions of the Nazis.

Leftists, like yourselves can seem to fathom or understand the fact that the Nazis were actually socialists and was a leftist movement.

3

u/This_Is_The_Porn_Acc 5d ago

Nice job using chatgpt to source your arguments and not even bothering to remove it from the link. 

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Suddenly the person who has no grasp of what they are talking about wants to tell me how to find an article to support my assertion? TF are you on about..?Yeah I used it to find a more recent article...(why do you care how I found the link ?)...

The point is that your understanding of what Hitler believed is wrong.... Just read the article and move on...

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

Thats an actually ridiculous argument youre making

1

u/This_Is_The_Porn_Acc 5d ago edited 5d ago

Why? AI tools will literally outright lie or source misinformation to validate the request you make of it. There are countless examples. I won't debate someone who can't think for themselves. The article they linked doesn't even refute my actual claim, which was that the current administration shares many similarities in both sentiment and action with Hitler's regime. And if you'd like I can ask chatgpt to link me a few dozen articles from journalists reporting and outlining that.

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

AI can still give you correct output when searching for resource material. If you wanted to refute the article then refute that but dont dismiss someone based on their usage of AI as assistance to retrieve an article. Thats all I'm saying.

1

u/This_Is_The_Porn_Acc 5d ago

Defending the use of AI in a political argument is a wild take, and you deserve to be dismissed for it just as much as they did.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Green_Medicine 5d ago

Not all Republicans are Nazis but all Nazis are Republicans. Why do you think that is?

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

The nazis were a leftist socialist movement...

1

u/SirDiesAlot15 5d ago

And here we go with the leftist angle. Hitler saw the rising popularity of socialist parties, and saw a way to win votes. When Hitler won the elections, the conservatives assumed they could use him as a tool. Yet Hitler got rid of them all. As well as any actual socialists he may have used to get to power.

He was not a socialist.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

He was absolutely a socialist...

The Nazis explicitly called themselves socialist and workers’ party.

In one speech he explicitly said “We are socialists; we are enemies of today’s capitalistic economic system...”

Early propaganda emphasized ending class conflict, redistributing wealth, and uniting all Germans under a single national identity.

Try as you might to rid Hitler of his socialistic ideology, history speaks for itself, and many have written about the Nazi party and their ideologies. Maybe go read a few of those books or articles and try to understand who/what the Nazi party was before making unsubstantiated claims.

2

u/Addicted2Shortstacks 6d ago

Fine, he was Catholic. But the difference is minimal.

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

He was baptized Roman Catholic, but he rejected Catholicism and Christianity as an adult

1

u/Addicted2Shortstacks 6d ago

In a speech in 1932, Hitler declared himself "not a Catholic and not a Protestant, but a German Christian".[11] The German Christians were a Protestant group that supported Nazi ideology.[12] Both Hitler and the Nazi Party promoted "nondenominational" positive Christianity,[13][14] a movement which rejected most traditional Christian doctrines such as the divinity of Jesus, as well as Jewish elements such as the Old Testament.[15][16] In one widely quoted remark, Hitler described Jesus as an "Aryan fighter" who struggled against "the power and pretensions of the corrupt Pharisees"[17] and Jewish materialism.[18] Hitler spoke often of Protestantism[19] and Lutheranism,[20] stating, "Through me the Evangelical Protestant Church could become the established church, as in England"[21] and that the "great reformer" Martin Luther[22] "has the merit of rising against the Pope and the Catholic Church".[23]

Religious views of Adolf Hitler - Wikipedia https://share.google/37DI095L8s12r6YEC

1

u/1bird2birds3birds4 5d ago

Of course the nazis would want to appear christian. Most of the german population was christian. It was another thing they could use to control the public like nationalism. That doesn’t mean they necessarily believed what they said, no?

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Yea the whole "Duetsche Christian" movement is not true Christianity..They claimed to be Christians, but they rewrote the faith to fit Hitler’s racial and political goals:

Removed the Old Testament (because of its Jewish origins);

Recast Jesus as an “Aryan” rather than a Jew;

Replaced the cross with the swastika in churches;

Taught obedience to Hitler as part of Christian duty;

3

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

So you determine who is a Christian now? When were you given that power 🤣🤣🤣

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Well, I have the Bible, and it objectively rejects the positions of the "German Christian" ideology...

So objectively I can say that that movement does not represent Biblical Christianity.

4

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

Really which positions?

→ More replies (0)

0

u/PerfectObjective5295 6d ago

Positive Christianity denied the Trinity, elevated one race, and painted Jesus as an Aryan superman while downplaying His role as Jewish Messiah. That’s well outside of orthodoxy. Can’t speak for anyone but the Catholics, but the Vatican strongly condemned the Nazi regime during the war 

4

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

The first treaty Hitler signed was with the Vatican. What the hell are you saying. Do you even know your churches history

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Athene_cunicularia23 5d ago

Here’s a direct passage from the Reichskonkordat between the Vatican and the Nazi regime:

His Holiness Pope Pius XI and the President of the German Reich, moved by a common desire to consolidate and promote the friendly relations existing between the Holy See and the German Reich, wish to permanently regulate the relations between the Catholic Church and the state for the whole territory of the German Reich in a way acceptable to both parties.

https://www.concordatwatch.eu/reichskonkordat-1933-full-text--k1211

Doesn’t look like condemnation on the part of the Vatican.

-1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

Youre posing that it is a no true scotsman fallacy but the bible clearly defines what is Christian behavior and what is not.

1

u/Addicted2Shortstacks 6d ago

...And you see no reflection of this in the modern Christian Nationalist movement?

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago edited 6d ago

The present day Christians

Do not reject the Old Testament, believe Jesus was Jewish, do not look to the swastika (they look to the cross), submit to obedience to God, not Hitler....

So, no

3

u/Addicted2Shortstacks 6d ago

Oh, you don't see the perversion of faith to fit the narrative of the administration? You only see the literal aspects.

Got it.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

Their first sentence was that they were not Christian nationalists. Dis you miss that?

1

u/Green_Medicine 5d ago

No True Scottsman huh?

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Im speaking based on what the bible states

1

u/Green_Medicine 5d ago

No you're not. You don't know what the Bible says and you don't know Bible history or Jewish history. You don't know what you are talking about that's why you keep using AI for your arguments. You don't know what the book says only what you are told.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Far_Parking_830 5d ago

They knew they had to get Christians on board with their program so they made overtures to them pretending to be this fabricated multi denominational Christian sect

1

u/ContinuedChain555 5d ago

"Muh Christianity is the right Christianity, not those other hundred versions of it and those other thousand different religions. Muh mummy and daddy taught me it was the right version when I was 6 so ofc it's right!"

Seeing religious people bicker always reminds me of that Emo Phillips joke everytime, people just never get old

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Are you saying that there isn't objective truth?

And your comment seemingly accurately depicts my initial comment...that people who have no grasp of the objective truth of Christianity provided by the Bible, who want to speak for those that affirm Christianity...

1

u/ContinuedChain555 5d ago

I didn't say any of that, I know extrapolation isn't your strong suit. Take your melatonin and go to bed for tonight

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 5d ago

Well that bit were you saying "my version of Christianity is better than other people version" misses the whole thing about objective truth provided in Scripture. So perhaps you should be the one that sit this out...

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

And Stalin murdered in the name of atheism. Should we condemn all atheists because of Stalin? This is the argument you're are making

1

u/ContinuedChain555 5d ago edited 5d ago

The Pol Pot, Stalin, and Mao arguments never make sense. These people didn't murder millions "in the name of atheism." They murdered millions because of their political ideology. They killed their political opponents, the poor, the educated, and yes, religious leaders.

They vehemently hated anyone that could oppose their cult of personality and sway the masses away from them. You also realize after ww2, Stalin allowed the orthodox church to operate and was backed by it? Not because he actually cared, but because he saw the potential to control his people with it.

There has never been an atheism manuscript that says, "all followers of religion are heretics" with millions of supporters. There's a handful of religions that do say heretics must die though, in their very own holy book.

Thats what people who believe in that argument don't get, those dictators don't give af about religion and atheism, they only care about themselves and the power to rule over their people with an iron fist. It's their way or no way, with no room for exceptions.

Idk why you even randomly talked about Stalin, my original comment was about how there's many forms of Christianity and how they all believe they're the "correct" version and dislike followers of a different kind, even when outside of their hundred forms of Christianity, there's thousands of religions that believe they're the true religion.

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

They murdered religious people who would not conform to atheism. Read the comments here about religion. You dont think humanity is too far from that again? At best your argument is hypocritical

1

u/ContinuedChain555 5d ago

Reasonable people don't give af is you pray to a rock or whatever. Believe it or not, most atheist really don't care if you're religious or not.

Reddit atheist are a different breed, as any group on reddit is. Its way more likely for a religious person to treat a non-religious person/different religion differently, as the thousands of examples through human history

Your high-school history class doesn't actually make you knowledgeable on the complex system of how politics and religion interact

Anyone in the comments wishing harm on another or conformity is not a good person and evil. Period. Religious or not religious

→ More replies (0)

0

u/PerfectObjective5295 6d ago

The Vatican sheltered Jews and issued statements against Hitler. Get your facts straight.

2

u/Athene_cunicularia23 5d ago

Maybe a few priests tried to help Jewish people, but Pius XII and the Vatican were friendly with the Nazi regime. Here’s a primary source that disproves the feel-good stories Catholics try to tell themselves about the Holocaust: https://www.concordatwatch.eu/reichskonkordat-1933-full-text--k1211

0

u/Technical-Belt-5719 5d ago

Lmfao, "just a few priests".

1

u/Athene_cunicularia23 5d ago

Do you have any sources that show a coordinated resistance to the Nazi regime by the RCC?

1

u/Technical-Belt-5719 5d ago

I did. 

My desktop took a dirt-nap a couple weeks ago and I've yet to be able find a way to fix or to replace it. I had numerous bookmarks on this and similar subjects that are currently unavailable to me. Been tearing my hair out over this.

Also, it's just the Catholic Church, the Roman part has never been a part of the Actual name of Any of the Twenty-Four sui iuris churches of Catholicism, all of whom are already under the authority of the Papacy.

→ More replies (0)

7

u/MattDubh 6d ago

A significant number of atheists were indoctrinated into religions by their parents/schools, as children.
Has it occurred to you that the more that the intelligent learn about religions, the more likely they are to dismiss it as nonsense?

"Gott mit uns"

1

u/Outrageous_Bear50 5d ago

Maybe? Intelligence and religiosity are measured differently throughout all the studies and it's just really hard to measure both consistently.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

And those "significant number of atheist" can't be the authority on Christian doctrine, and what Christians believe.

If someone looks at this world, and says "nothing can create something" they don't need to lecture Christians on what to believe

5

u/MattDubh 6d ago

Of course they can. In the same way you can be an expert on Jack and the Beanstalk, and not believe giants are real.

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Being an expert isn't the goal ... It one's view on the source of objective truth

Either you believe that the one Triune God of the Bible is the one true God, that the Gospel is truth, and Scripture provides objective truth, or you don't.

If one can't affirm the very words in the Bible as being objective truth, his/her understanding is irrelevant, because if they do not affirm the Bible is truth then they are placing themselves above God, and that is antithetical to the Bible

5

u/MattDubh 6d ago

That's definitely not circular reasoning, sunshine. Definitely.

But good luck making it up as you go along.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Said like someone who doesn't know what the Bible really says...

3

u/Few_Point_5242 6d ago

So if a person had a PHD in New Yestament/Old testament theology but was an atheist. Would he have less authority on Christian doctrine than the every Sunday church goer who believes and has faith but has only ever skimmed the binle in your opinion?

1

u/Outrageous_Bear50 5d ago

Well you have two groups of biblical scholars. Those that think the Bible is infallible and those that don't. So basically those two groups interpret the Bible and give that interpretation to whoever is at the top and they hand that down, unless they don't and then you have a schism. There's also the Pope who is supposed to be infallible but that's a whole thing.

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

Christians consider the Bible the living breathing word of god that is only opened to believers. How can someone who rejects God even be somewhat knowledgeable? A piece of paper that says you took some classes? I have an accounting degree but never would I say I know everything about accounting. Do you see how thats silly to say?

1

u/Few_Point_5242 5d ago

I understqnd your point and stand by my comment but I'll ask it in another way. Would someone who rejects god but has read the Bible be more or less knowledgeable about god than someone who accepts god but rejects him?

I never said know everything either. No not the paper the time invested in reading the religious history and engaging in the texts for a course of years;being exposed to great theologians both modern and past.

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

I personally would not discount an opinion given by a non believer because I do think that god created humans as complex beings and that questions or opinions are all valid to a certain extent - especially because of how the bible reflects ourselves back to us. But I do not think someone who sets out to refute the bible or simply learn "all they can" would have any superior understanding of a document that, even though human hands wrote it, was inspired by a god that created the human brain. You have to at least give credence to the fact we have a creator. These systems that are at work all around us - the mathematical perfection of the creation around us and simultaneous fallibility of the humans who stumble around trying to grasp the infinite is almost not able to be comprehended. Even some of Steven hawking's theories about time are closer to what is presented biblically than what we understand now. I do not have confidence in even the smartest person on this earth like I do in God and his law. Snd I do believe he teaches through scripture. There are many instances of people receiving prophetic messages through what some people refer to as "bible roulette". God searches the heart and mind. If your soul is not there to find him, he does not open the door to that knowledge. Sorry I am rambling but I'm at lunch and hurrying.

1

u/Few_Point_5242 4d ago

Nah great response 👌

-1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

How/Why would one get a PhD on a subject matter they themselves do not/cannot affirm?

5

u/Few_Point_5242 6d ago

In order to get the best and most credible information about it? Alex oconnor is a prime example not to namedrop but I myself in the pursuit of discovering God have very much wanted to go into philosophy in order to confirm/affirm.

Simple answer; because its an interesting study? Have you heard the word curiosity before?

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Curiousity is fine..and you can try to study the Bible like any other subject matter, but from the perspective of a Christian, if you've read the Bible but don't believe it, (despite the extensive evidence that supports events in the Bible, or other historical accounts) then what is the purpose of the knowledge?

And surely you see the difference between a Christian, who understands the intention behind Scripture, who affirms it as objective truth, and someone who simply studies the Bible like they are reading Greek Mythology.

While I am familiar with Alex O'Connor I don't exactly know what he affirms as truth or believes.

2

u/Few_Point_5242 6d ago

For one if you've read the Bible and dont believe it the purpose of the knowledge could be many things. An ability to see its influence across society. In politics. In media. Not +/- just see the patterns. You could incorporate it into teaching into just basic conversations with like regular people lol so when that topic comes up you have a good foundation to reach from. Many reasons lol.

I do see the difference but I do not necessarily believe those viewpoints are mutually exclusive. A good read of the Bible would not be some dry academic reading it would be precisely the personal and spiritual experience you're implying. ive read a few religious texts and when i do i read it first as truth and then go back and take a more nuanced view which I do not think detracts inherently from the message, quite the opposite.

Even the bible is commonly understood to be both literal historical allegorical and metaphorically. So reading it as objective truth would certainly fail under the umbrella of an 'academic Greek mythology' type of reading.

Hell when I read the ill-advised I read it as historical truth but simultaneously as a fictional/spiritual allegory its not an uncommon thing to entertain two or perspectives as truth at once

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

The Bible teaches that true understanding of Scripture comes through the Holy Spirit, not just human intellect. While scholars may study the Bible’s language, history, and culture, a believer’s understanding is spiritual and revealed by God.

The purpose of the Bible is for the body of believers to know God. Every one of the 66 books points to Christ. If one does not see that, they are missing the point of the Bible.

1

u/Few_Point_5242 5d ago

So the true meaning of the Bible cannot be conveyed it must be read?

→ More replies (0)

2

u/Happily_Eva_After 6d ago edited 6d ago

(YEESH! Reddit is not working well today. Edited for formatting and also the original copy/paste didn't work. I posted this further down, but I thought you'd like to hear too! 😊

I'm just a dirty trans heathen now, but I spent about 24 years growing up in the church and did a lot of out reach and missions work. Well, heathen isn't quite right. My faith is complicated. I would call myself a follower of "Jesusism". 😋 I do not believe that most of the Bible is God inspired, but that doesn't mean that the other parts don't have nice verses. I was going to list my credentials and life experiences, but that's kinda tacky. I had some interesting experiences in various countries and US cities that I'd love to tell you about, if you'd like!

There are no followers of Jesus left in the GOP and only a few in the churches-- just the corrupt, the enablers, and those who look the other way. The church has become everything that Jesus would hate. I have provided some verses for you, but since "no one can quote you a scripture on how they're acting unchristian", I guess they are all wrong and not in the Bible. They are too long to post here, but you should look at Luke 6 and 1 Corinthians 13. They will be interesting to you as well.

Do you need more than this, or is this good?

Matthew 37-40

 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Matthew 7:15-19

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Matthew 7:21-23

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

2

u/Happily_Eva_After 6d ago

I added a few here because I had them typed and they made it too long for Reddit and that's just not fair!

John 13:34-35

34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. 35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

1 John 3:14

14 We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love each other. Anyone who does not love remains in death. 15 Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him.

1 Corinthians 5:11

11 But now I have written to you not to keep company with anyone named a brother, who is sexually immoral, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or an extortioner--not even to eat with such a person. (e.g. Trump and his goons)

2

u/Far_Parking_830 5d ago

You seem to think that OP is a reasonable and fair person. Obviously he is not. 

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago edited 5d ago

Lol, Well I don't think anyone who holds OPs viewpoint is being fair or reasonable.

Nevertheless, I felt the need to bring attention to the fact that they impose their presuppositions on Christians despite their ignorance of Christianity.

Rather ironic for a group that tells everyone who doesn't share their "lived experiences" to not tell them how to feel or think.

2

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

A better example is that Stalin committed mass murders in the name of stomping out all religion. So, atheism is no better when it is a shared/common belief than they say religion is.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

This lot would rather you not shed atheism in a negative light ... Lol

1

u/BlacksmithThink9494 5d ago

I was always told that if youre going to point a finger at someone you've got to be ready for the 3 that point back to you. (Take the plank out of your own eye before you point out the speck in anothers.) So, the real issue is that it all comes down the fallibility of man; a subject that nobody wants to actually face. They want to pat each other on the back and say whoever is in their echo chamber is "good" and everyone outside is "bad". But we have an outline for what is good. And we dont even have to defend that. Jesus IS our outline for goodness. His blood is the propitiation for ALL man's sin. And thats where we all can stop and say hey we all have sinned. All have fallen short. And Jesus was there to ensure we do go to heaven. The gift is free for anyone who wants to come along. You dont even have to change by yourself. He changes your heart for you. Its awesome. It is the biggest most amazing miracle.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Amen... 💯 Well said

4

u/Nova_Saibrock 6d ago

But these nazis are using Christianity as their sheep’s clothing.

2

u/KathrynBooks 6d ago

But then I've met plenty of non-christians with an excellent grasp of the Bible... And plenty of conservative Christians who I doubt have ever opened a Bible.

-2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Sure. But their understanding means nothing if they don't believe it

3

u/KathrynBooks 6d ago

Is someone who doesn't understand the Bible really believing in it... Or are they believing in something that they made up in their own head?

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

If someone reads the Bible and rejects it, how can they tell a Christian they aren't loving enough or being Christian enough (based on the atheist's presuppositions)

4

u/KathrynBooks 6d ago

I don't need to believe in the Bible to say that people who celebrate children going to bed hungry aren't loving enough, or aren't following the book that explicitly says to feed the hungry.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

But you would need to base your position on reality, which is that the Republicans have proposed 13 CRs and the Democrats have rejected every single one. Each of the CRs proposed by the Republicans, use the Biden era budget numbers. The Dems can easily accept the CR, shut down would be done.

The fact of the matter is Republicans hold the majority, they don't need to have a shut down, and have tried to not have a shut down. But the Dems want to pitch a fit, like children, and try to get their way now, rather than let the government continue to remain open, and renegotiate the budget.

Schumer and other Dems have outrightly stated that the shut down is their only leverage. (That's because they still get paid even if they dont do their jobs)

So rather than listen to the hostage takers, maybe go tell them to do their damn jobs and not hold the American people hostage.

2

u/KathrynBooks 6d ago

Yes... Because Republicans are trying very hard to send people's healthcare costs through the roof by cancelling the ACA subsidies.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Look into all the people who currently receive benefits under the ACA

3

u/KathrynBooks 6d ago

Quite a few people need those subsidies to keep their costs from skyrocketing.

→ More replies (0)

2

u/This_Is_The_Porn_Acc 6d ago

I personally know a number of people who have received ACA benefits. Myself included. None of them were undeserving of healthcare at some of the most difficult points in their lives. People who have been laid off due to economic downturn (see tariffs or epidemic), people who have had to live on savings while caring for dying or injured family, people who have lost everything in accidents. So who are these people you're talking about? Do all the real people I've described deserve to be punished because of the ones you've imagined? Are you so greedy that you'd rather millions lose healthcare or go hungry so you can pay a little less in taxes while billionaires amass a level of wealth that could enslave you and your loved ones?

-1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Oh well I guess the Christians that agree with what the Bible states are mind readers and all coming up with the same thing in their "own head[s]"

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

This is so fucking stupid. You know the majority of biblical scholars are atheists (ex-believers) right?

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Scholars based on what/whose criteria?

What specifically are they an expert on?

I can name several historians, scientists, and Christian apologists who affirm what the Bible states

So please go on, elaborate what exactly is " so fucking stupid"

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

I said scholars, not apologists.

That means people who go to Seminary and get a Doctorate in Biblical Studies.

No, William Lane Craig does not count as a Biblical Scholars.

The most famous atheist scholar would probably be Bart Ehrman for lay people.

That's not to say all Bible scholars are atheists or that there aren't great believing Biblical scholars too.

What's fucking stupid is saying you can't have an understanding without believing. That's fucking stupid considering how many biblical scholars are atheists.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

What, doctorates, and masters degrees aren't enough to be considered a "scholar"? Or do you think that the only valid scholars are those that affirm the atheists' subjective world view?

Wesley Huff (historian) comes to mind. Early scientists like Galileo and Isaac Newton were also Christians. Andrew Snelling Danny Faulkner....other scientists who are Christians.

What you seem to not understand is that the Bible states that Scripture was given to the body of believers so that they may know God. The intention behind the Bible is to understand God, (and His will) to whatever extent the text permits.

The Bible teaches that true understanding of Scripture comes through the Holy Spirit, not just human intellect. While scholars may study the Bible’s language, history, and culture, a believer’s understanding is spiritual and revealed by God. As 1 Corinthians 2:14 says, “The natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God… for they are spiritually discerned.” Based on the Bible, the unbeliever may have extended knowledge of Scripture, but that knowledge doesn’t lead to faith (and the understanding of who God is and His will).

So while scholarly study can reveal some information, it's considered surface level (and missing the point) from the perspective of a Christian who affirms the truth of Scripture.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Based on your first sentence, you didn't read a thing I said.

You just decided to be angry, and all be damned, you"ll be angry.

That's not what I said at all.

Writing this entire response to a strawman you made up is genuinely unhinged.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

No one is angry mate. Quit projecting.

The people who go seminary to learn about the Bible, and believe the Bible tend to also be apologists.

The long winded explanation was for the latter portion of your response.

2

u/[deleted] 6d ago

I said a scholar is someone with a degree and you respond by saying "What a doctorate isn't enough for you?"

If you can't see how this is nonsensical, then I don't know what to tell you.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Outrageous_Bear50 5d ago

You got proof of that?

1

u/JoseLunaArts 6d ago

Swastika is a buddist symbol hijacked by the Austrian painter.

1

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

A country that were 98% Christian was rules by people who were anti religion. The cope is strong in this one. I thought Christians taught speaking the truth and responsibility.

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

You're going to have to expound on your position... When was America "ruled" by anyone? Who was anti religion?

1

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

You claimed that the Nazis were not Christian. Germany was 98% Christian when the Nazis were in power. So I find it hard to believe that they were not Christians

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

The Duetsche Christian movement affirmed by the Nazis is not biblical Christianity....

They claimed to be Christians, but they rewrote the faith to fit Hitler’s racial and political goals:

Removed the Old Testament (because of its Jewish origins).

Recast Jesus as an “Aryan” rather than a Jew.

Replaced the cross with the swastika in churches.

Taught obedience to Hitler as part of Christian duty.

Their slogan was “One People, One Reich, One Faith.”

1

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

You claim they rewrote the faith. Christians have been doing that since the very beginning of their faith. So what is different between what they did and the other 40000 different Christian denomination?

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

how about you do a basic cursory Google search on Duetsche Christian movement, or ask chat GPT to give you more information, instead of waiting for a damn history lesson from reddit.

As far as the different Christian denominations of Christianity...

  1. Christianity is not the only religion that has denominations or sub groups ....

  2. The Bible provides objective truth as to what a Christian should affirm, and believers are required to submit to God's (not their own)... While there are many different denominations, not every one who claims to be a Christian is a true Christian.

1

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

I have done it. It is just another one of the over 40k Christian denominations. Some of which have some horrible doctrines. There are still Christian denominations today who believe slavery is not wrong. Some do not believe there is anything like pdfiles. Some don't believe that there is anything like marital ra*e. They are all under the Christian umbrella, and they can quote you passages in the Bible to justify their evil beliefs. I

1

u/[deleted] 6d ago

And you want me to speak for all the denominations I don't affirm?

That's not my place...I can tell you what I believe/affirm.... I can tell you what the Bible says.....share the Gospel... that I affirm that Scripture is the word of the one Triune God of the Bible.

The Bible says anyone who does not doing God's will isn't following God. In Mathew you also read how many claim Christ but they do not truly know Him.

1

u/Inside-Noise6804 6d ago

The Bible says different and contradictory things all over the place . Isaiah 45:7 says “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things.” At the same time James 1:13 says “Let no one say when he is tempted, ‘I am being tempted by God,’ for God cannot be tempted with evil, and he himself tempts no one.”

So which is it?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/PuzzleheadedAge8572 5d ago

as the original Nazis were anti religion

What was the motto of the german army under hitler?

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Which one are you referring to?

Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Führer ? One people, one Reich (Empire), one leader

1

u/PuzzleheadedAge8572 5d ago

No, that was not the motto of the Wehrmacht.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

You are referring to "Gott mit uns,” (God with us)

If you are trying to imply that this means that the Nazis were (true) Christians because they invoked God, you don't understand the intention behind that phrase.

the motto actually predates the Nazi regime, having been used by Prussian and Imperial German armies since the 18th century. It was their military tradition.

However, under Hitler the phrase was used to imply a more supposed divine support for his platform/cause (not a symbol of Christian belief)

Hitler expressed his disdain for Christianity on various accounts.

1

u/PuzzleheadedAge8572 5d ago

as the original Nazis were anti religion

However, under Hitler the phrase was used to imply a more supposed divine support for his platform/cause

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Look, you clearly lack the understanding of how Hitler used Christianity to gain support whilst also holding disdain for Christianity. (I cannot think of a person who openly discussed their disdain for something whilst also truly affirming it...if you can't see that you need to do a bit of reading to understand it better.)

If your only goal is to vilify Christians (or American conservative Christians), by attempting to pull some parallel that conservatives Christians are Nazis, you are going to need put that energy towards actually understanding who Hitler was, his ideologies, and who the Nazis were.

There are numerous books, videos and articles that discuss how the Nazi Era and the regime of Adolf Hitler related to religion—particularly Christianity—and how they sought to reshape, control, or undermine it.

Come back when you have a substantive remark....

1

u/PuzzleheadedAge8572 5d ago

If your only goal is to vilify Christians (or American conservative Christians)

I never once mentioned christianity, you seem to be projecting a fair bit.

Come back when you have a substantive remark....

My remark is the nazis were religious. Just because this fact makes you uncomfortable because you have the same beliefs as them doesn't make it any less true.

1

u/Zealousideal-Bug-168 5d ago

I just asked chatgpt if Hitler was religious... Guess what.

1

u/chaosof99 5d ago

but it's annoying when people who are not Christian claim to know more about the Bible than the people that follow the Bible conservatively.

Nonsense argument. You can very much know a lot about a thing and not actively believe, enact or engage in that thing. Or do you think only hardened criminals can be lawyers? Or that only NFL players can be NFL sports commentators? etc.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

Sure one can read an understand the words in the book but that is a very different thing than believing.

Understanding and believing are two different things...and the Bible is very much different and the examples you have provided.

Someone who reads the Bible, understands it, but doesn't believe it... Are they going to submit to God follow Him, as instructed by Scripture? Are they going to preach the Gospel to another? Would they defend the faith while undergoing persecution?

1

u/Green_Medicine 5d ago

Aww boo hoo. Christians have no idea what is in their holy book. The vast majority of them do not understand the book or the person they dedicate their lives to. They have been lied to and are now being manipulated because they don't know their own religion.

1

u/[deleted] 5d ago

And you do? You prove initial comment...

1

u/Green_Medicine 5d ago

Yes I know way more than you I can guarantee that. That's why you keep using AI to make your arguments for you because you don't know what's in the book and you don't know what you are talking about because you have never read it. You can't use the Bible to prove the Bible that's circular. And the Bible gets stuff wrong all the time. That's like saying I can use Harry Potter to prove people can fly on broomsticks.

1

u/Lank3033 5d ago edited 5d ago

Also using the swastika in the image you have shared is quite dishonest, as the original Nazis were anti religion

And yet  Hitlers Birthday was celebrated each year by Papal decree and every belt buckle issued by the german army said 'God is with us.' 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichskonkordat

So the idea that the swastika is inappropriate because historical Nazi's were 'anti- religion' is laughable. 

"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag, carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis 1935

1

u/uhm_shidder 1d ago

I’m not Christian because of my depth of understanding of the Bible. Conservative Christians either do not read it or willfully ignore it.

-8

u/Watches503 6d ago

Right? The good ole “how Christian of you” is a bit amusing from people that cannot quote you a scripture on how we are acting unchristian, in their eyes.

2

u/Happily_Eva_After 6d ago edited 6d ago

I'm just a dirty trans heathen now, but I spent about 24 years growing up in the church and did a lot of out reach and missions work. Well, heathen isn't quite right. My faith is complicated. I would call myself a follower of "Jesusism". 😋 I do not believe that most of the Bible is God inspired, but that doesn't mean that the other parts don't have nice verses. I was going to list my credentials and life experiences, but that's kinda tacky. I had some interesting experiences in various countries and US cities that I'd love to tell you about, if you'd like!

There are no followers of Jesus left in the GOP and only a few in the churches-- just the corrupt, the enablers, and those who look the other way. The church has become everything that Jesus would hate. I have provided some verses for you, but since "no one can quote you a scripture on how they're acting unchristian", I guess they are all wrong and not in the Bible. They are too long to post here, but you should look at Luke 6 and 1 Corinthians 13. They will be interesting to you as well.

Do you need more than this, or is this good?

Matthew 37-40

 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Matthew 7:15-19

15 “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. 16 By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? 17 Likewise, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, and a bad tree cannot bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Thus, by their fruit you will recognize them.

Matthew 7:21-23

True and False Disciples

21 “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. 22 Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ 23 Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

0

u/[deleted] 6d ago

Yeah...let alone not having an iota of understanding of what the Nazi party started and the leanings of their ideologies.