Evangelicals Are Now Rejecting ‘Liberal’ Teachings of Jesus
“Multiple pastors tell me, essentially, the same story about quoting the Sermon on the Mount, parenthetically, in their preaching’turn the other cheek’[and] to have someone come up after to say, ‘Where did you get those liberal talking points?’” Moore said.
“When the pastor would say, ‘I’m literally quoting Jesus Christ’ … The response would be, 'Yes, but that doesn’t work anymore. That’s weak,” he added. “When we get to the point where the teachings of Jesus himself are seen as subversive to us, then we’re in a crisis.”
And people dont understand why I say the orange clown is an Antichrist and may be the Antichrist.
The doomed by a perfect circle is very disturbing accurate.
Came here to share the same article.
It’s truly uncanny
I reckon it has a lot to do with personality traits of evil people
Yeah, while there are a few odd specifics that line up, most of the predictions are just describing the personality traits of a tyrant.
If someone asked me what Trump sounded like I would never think about a lion. His voice is nasally and weak. That part reminded me a lot more of Hitler yelling into a microphone
That’s also how I interpret the traits.
It’s common warning signs but using colorful language.
That guy is still in a doomsday cult in his head.
Ehh, isn’t the antichrist supposed to be a nearly impossibly attractive person, in charisma and looks? A lot of people either hate him or are entirely indifferent and the reasons don’t seem to be religiously motivated.
I just settle with him being a douchebag.
Don’t forgot about how all his weird followers depict him in their fan art though…. They seem to at least perceive him as exactly that.
This is still what baffles me. We aren’t losing our country to a charismatic, two faced mastermind. We’re losing our country to a fucking obvious loser. He’s literally so bad it’s hard to parody him since even the parodies are tame in comparison to what he actually does. It’s ridiculous
Most people are not sharp enough to see that.
We are doomed by the cuts to education they made 40 years ago
isn’t the antichrist supposed to be a nearly impossibly attractive person
Premillennial dispensationalism/rapture theology is a group creative writing exercise with little relevance to the text. The prophecies in Daniel refer to the Greek king Antiochus, which is clear when one reads chapters and not verses (unfortunately uncommon in your typical Protestant church…) Revelation is referring to emperor Nero.
Really, it’s more that folks like Hal Lindsey popularized the concept by traumatizing children in church basements that’s given it the culture cachet.
As others have said, that part’s more modern. But also, look at what’s going on, a lot of people hate him, but he has some sort of charisma to draw so many people to lockstep with him.
And one of the big things in revalations about the antichrist is that a lot of Christians will follow him because their faith is tainted and corrupted
Yeah I’m not a Christian, and I know many Christians hate the “reasonable hope for salvation of righteous nonbelievers” thing, but I’ll say this, I’ve got a strong suspicion that if I’m wrong about the veracity of Christianity then Jesus will still prefer my behavior to the maga christians’
Prosperity gospel has been shitting on the red text of Christ for decades now.
Jesus hated wealth inequality. The only group he said would never enter heaven were the wealthy (“easier to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven”, in other words, it isn’t possible for the rich to enter heaven). Jesus also violently flipped tables and whipped the wealthy to drive them out of temples.
So conservative “Christians” abandoned the teachings of Christ many decades ago.
Not just the wealthy, but people who were using the temple as a place of business (and likely ripping people off on interest)
The actual story of the money changers is worse than most people know.
See, as part of their religious observance, the ancient Hebrews made a pilgrimage to the Temple. This was a mandatory part of their faith, much like the Hajj is for modern Muslims.
Those who were too poor to bring their own sacrifice could buy one at the Temple, but the Temple didn’t take the coin of the realm (the Roman coins), they only accepted Shekels.
So, the Money Changers. They set up in the Temple itself and were fleecing pilgrims of all their money.
In comes Jesus, who flipped tables and broke out the whip, and less than a week later he was crucified.
And this is the only part of the bible that I believe is 100% historically accurate. A peace loving Rabbi threw a fit over the Money Changers and was crucified for it.
I had understood it to be even worse:
The sacrifices at the temple were expected to be pretty much perfect, and had to be found acceptable by the temple priests. So the merchants would get “pre-blessed” sacrifices that they would sell at exorbitant prices to the pilgrims, who would have the sacrifices they brought deemed “inadequate” by the priests.
So if you brought an animal sacrifice, you’d still have to buy another (costly) animal. If you brought money, you’d be forced to exchange it at a significant loss.
The whole thing was an obvious scam, and Jesus was killed over it (and the rest of his message). I don’t believe he was God Incarnate, but I’m still a big fan of Jesus the man.
I’m pretty confident that all would have gone about the same way in this era.
Yeah, it was the moneychangers and the stall keepers that tolerated them.
It was a religious duty to contribute money for the upkeep of the temple. So people would come from out of town and try to hand over their cash and the priests would say “we can’t accept foreign coinage… go talk to that dude over there with the heavy pockets, he’ll help you”. And the moneychanger would convert their currency, but not without keeping a fat percentage for himself.
The lesson (as I read it) is that setting yourself up as a gatekeeper and forcing people to pay you in order to do the right thing is an especially odious behaviour, even if it’s legal.
Technically the Bible had been changing since Jesus’s death
The gospels were probably not written until many decades after his death.
Yeah - stuff we consider the canon was essentially wrapped up by about 100 CE.
The gospels were likely individuals taking other written material that was circulating around the time, and making their own little compilation based on the theological points that they wanted to make.
It’s really clear when you read the gospels and know the order. Mark was probably first, Matthew and Luke pull heavily from Mark and share something from something we call “Q” and maybe a “saying source.” Then John was written last.
It’s really clear when you look at the differences between the scene where they go to get Jesus’s body. In Mark - it’s just a guy who tells them Jesus isn’t there. Matthew has an earthquake and an Angel, Luke has two angels, John has Jesus himself say hi. John is where you get the most “divine” Jesus - because it really does seem that at first Jesus was understood as a mortal man speaking for God, but later influences from Greek philosophy and thoughts about “spirit” slowly turned Jesus into God.
Visions of religious leaders sitting in golden chairs and crying out for donations…
How did we get here? It’s not a mystery, it’s a cautionary tale.
deleted by creator
And as he was setting out on his journey, a man ran up and knelt before him and asked him, “Good Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?” And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call me good? No one is good except God alone. You know the commandments: ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’” And he said to him, “Teacher, all these I have kept from my youth.” And Jesus, looking at him, loved him, and said to him, “You lack one thing: go, sell all that you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” Disheartened by the saying, he went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions.
Mark 10:17-22
deleted by creator
And Jesus looked around and said to his disciples, “How difficult it will be for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God!” And the disciples were amazed at his words. But Jesus said to them again, “Children, how difficult it is to enter the kingdom of God! It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich person to enter the kingdom of God.” And they were exceedingly astonished, and said to him, “Then who can be saved?” Jesus looked at them and said, “With man it is impossible, but not with God. For all things are possible with God.” Peter began to say to him, “See, we have left everything and followed you.” Jesus said, “Truly, I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or lands, for my sake and for the gospel, who will not receive a hundredfold now in this time, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and lands, with persecutions, and in the age to come eternal life. But many who are first will be last, and the last first.”
Mark 10:23-31
Historical Jesus was not on team money and power I don’t think.
deleted by creator
Seems like it would be pretty difficult to get a camel through a needle eye. (That “oh he was actually referring to a gate” is modern horseshit apologetics designed for rich Christians to justify having money btw, totally made up.)
Jesus didn’t talk about wealth inequality in that way, as far as wealth being bad.
He flat-out said, if you’re rich in this life, you’ve had your reward already and you won’t get into heaven.
deleted by creator
easier to pass through the eye of a needle
Easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle…
Some bootlickers go through ridiculous contortions to avoid the plain sense of this analogy: “The Eye of the Needle was a gate in Jerusalem!” (That excuse was a late medieval fabrication by an indulgence-selling cleric craving donations from aristocrats-- there’s no such gate and never was, and if there was one, the saying would make no sense).
I guess we’re going to get more denominational splits based on if Jesus’ teachings about loving others is Biblically accurate. Yet another reason why he isn’t coming back.
Same flawed logic the Russian Orthodox Church used to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
Their new Jesus is Trump.
“I hate you guys, kill yourself” said Jesus probably during daylight saving time because he didn’t sleep enough.
Fair enough, that’s enough to make me give up on humanity.
I hear he also dropped the n word a couple times on Twitter but he was taking Ambien so it wasn’t his fault.
Also, Jesus was so just of full love when they did the Nazi salute twice.
The only difference between a religion and a cult is time
I’ve heard the distinction described as “it’s a cult when the founder is still around making stuff up, it becomes a religion after he dies and his followers are left to continue doing that in his name.”
Number of followers helps too.
I have as much authority as the Pope. I just don’t have as many people who believe it.
George Carlin
The difference is sincerity.
Apparently started from a hate ministry in 2021… Dude named James White on Twitter.
"When you start with man as image-bearing creature of God, you can understand why sympathy is good, but empathy is sinful.
Do not surrender our mind to the sinful emotional responses of others."
I don’t get it, “image-bearing creature of God”??
Asking religion to make sense is like asking a fish to describe outer space.
I think his point is that humans are meaningless little things made just to be in the image of “God” and should “get over themselves” since it’s all about God and not at all about humanity.
Seemingly, that somehow doesn’t apply to having him shut up and stop making it about himself.
The sinful emotional response caused by losing your home after the landlord tripled the rent
Yeah, I came across some article he wrote. He basically said if he hates someone, they deserve it because god says so, and if anyone disagrees with him, they are making it about “them” and not Jesus.
He evidently (understandably) got blowback on Twitter back in the day, and wrote some word vomit that sums up to “No no, you don’t understand, what I said is not as bad as you think it is (it’s sooooo much worse)”
So then… We don’t need to apply empathy to whoever that guy is.
Who’s her?
Bishop Mariann Edgar Budde. She asked Trump to have mercy for immigrants and pissed him off.
…she’s an episcopalian bishop who led trump’s inaugural service, asking that he accept god’s humility and share his mercy with marginalised people who fear him, specifically naming genderqueer, immigrant, and refugee populations…
Every time I see that I’m so skeeved out. Like I understand needing to close your heart’s empathy to deceivers. It’s something I’ve had to do with abusers who play on pity. But this is language that you use to prepare people to do evil
Notably, I don’t think folks would consider Christian teaching would not explicitly declare that you should hate (that part is usually just implied).
Generally what they say is that while you shouldn’t just yield and let “bad” people walk all over you and society, you shouldn’t “hate” them either.
This sounds like Warhammer 40K flavour text. How can anyone write this and think that they are the good guy?
deleted by creator
“Thou shalt not even try to be a decent person”
the 11th commandment I guess
My sister once told my mom that empathy is what’s ruining this country. It’s not even like it was a misinterpretation/misunderstanding, that’s almost word for word how she said it. I can’t fathom how someone comes to that line of thinking.
To me it feels like social darwinism mentality - the belief that helping the weak survive weakens the herd. AKA “hard choices”.
The problem is that’s actually the opposite of how that works. If you refuse to care for the weak in your community, you foster this atmosphere of sociopathy and mistrust that causes the group to destroy itself.
Why the hell do you think there are only two Sith in Star Wars?
I can not understand how people can be social darwinist and still support inheritance, even tax free inheritance. If you want just the fittest to survive, everyone needs to start the same. Same education, same situation at home, same connections of the parents. Social darwinist should support that all children are taken from their parents and be brought up in the same orphanages and are given exactly the same tools.
That said, I can not understand social darwinists at all. Whoever is dumb enough to support this idea is hurting the herd and according to social darwinists…
“The rich are passing down superior wealth just as they pass down superior genes.”
It’s all a crock of shit, but I’ve met people who believe it.
When I confronted my very Repub dad about the discrepancy between inheritance being okay and giving poor people things for free was bad for them because bootstraps etc, his reaction was “It’s their money, they can give it to whoever they want.”
But I don’t see why social darwinists would support raising children under identical conditions. A level playing field isn’t part of their creed. They just don’t believe in hampering the superior to take care of the inferior. My dad left me and my sister ample inheritances, and if anything I think he would see that as a sentimental flaw he was entitled to. But if he thought we were the type to blow the money on blackjack and hookers he probably would have donated it to Republicans, thinking that in the long run it was best for us…
No thinking was involved. She was repeating something she heard on fascist media.
Elon Musk is how.
This happened a while before he came out as a right wing nut job and was embraced by conservatives
He literally said this two weeks ago. " The death of the West is due to too much empathy." Paraphrased, of course.
Yeah but what does that have to do with the other posters sister saying it a while back?
I can tell you pretty easily but that won’t stop you from pretending to be surprised for internet points next time
Conservative empathy is reserved only for close associations, it is a crisis management mode that modern doomteller media actively stokes with imaginary threats of immigrants and trans people so it is ALWAYS on
In times of crisis, humanity’s generosity contracts as we have to do the cold calculations over limited resources and the fact that we do NOT value every person equally.
Example: If I only had enough food for me and one other person, I would not give that food to a bigot because that food is better served in the belly of a progressive
It’s just that they are triggered into this mode at all times and their circle of empathy is basically only family and friends, but deep down it is always only just them if times get hard enough
You saw the same behavior in times of famine all across the world
Empathy is the enemy of the the manipulative. Their shallow and transparent manipulations wont get past someone with even a small amount of it.
True for some. Others specifically exploit your empathy by centering it on themselves, red herrings, or subverting the action it motivates.
Proverbs 14:31 Whoever oppresses the poor shows contempt for their Maker, but whoever is kind to the needy honors God.
Deuteronomy 15:7 If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites in any of the towns of the land the Lord your God is giving you, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them.
Luke 14:13-14 But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind, and you will be blessed. Although they cannot repay you, you will be repaid at the resurrection of the righteous.
Luke 12:15: Then he said, “Beware! Guard against every kind of greed. Life is not measured by how much you own.”
1 John 4:20 If anyone says, “I love God,” yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen.
1 John 3:17 But if anyone has the world’s goods and sees his brother in need, yet closes his heart against him, how does God’s love abide in him?
John 13:34 “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.
Matthew 25 (separation of the sheep and the goats) is pretty much the only time Jesus straight-up threatens people with Hell, and he’s basing it on the treatment of the poor, sick, and social outcasts.
Warning to Rich Oppressors
5 Now listen, you rich people, weep and wail because of the misery that is coming on you. 2 Your wealth has rotted, and moths have eaten your clothes. 3 Your gold and silver are corroded. Their corrosion will testify against you and eat your flesh like fire. You have hoarded wealth in the last days. 4 Look! The wages you failed to pay the workers who mowed your fields are crying out against you. The cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord Almighty. 5 You have lived on earth in luxury and self-indulgence. You have fattened yourselves in the day of slaughter.[a] 6 You have condemned and murdered the innocent one, who was not opposing you.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=James+5&version=NIV
A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.
Imagine if they just threw away the whole fucking book before this, we would have a better world.
Turns out you can fit pretty much the entirety of Christian morality inside of a fortune cookie and the rest is just window dressing.
If Jesus ever returned, evangelicals will try to crucify him
Remind me which level of Hell the hypocrites are in? Is it higher or lower than the one reserved for Jesus now?
I mean I’ve seen some random Instagram stuff where Republicans think that Jesus would not allow immigrants into this country. It truly is another level of delusion at this point
Don’t forget that Instagram is owned by Meta. They’ve admitted to making people up to get more engagement and rage bait.
Was curious and went looking. Is this what you’re referencing? I’m not sure since it doesn’t sound like they were made just to drum up outrage, they were just inherently shitty because they’re AI users who suck at pretending to be people.
I can’t find it anymore, but there was an AI they created that specifically was spouting Russian misinformation to drive engagement. People found it, watched it, and then found others. I’ll keep looking.
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/meta-wants-more-ai-bots-on-facebook-and-instagram.html
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/01/03/business/meta-ai-accounts-instagram-facebook/index.html
Edit: Here’s one: https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/03/11/1020600/facebook-responsible-ai-misinformation/
Edit 2: Another: https://www.npr.org/2024/05/14/1251072726/ai-spam-images-facebook-linkedin-threads-meta
Edit 3: The best one: https://opentools.ai/news/facebooks-ai-generated-people-future-of-engagement-or-privacy-pitfall
These AI entities are designed to boost interactivity and engagement, aligning with Meta’s push towards generative AI. While the innovation promises enhanced social media experiences, it also raises significant concerns over data privacy and the potential misuse of user-generated content for AI training. Join us as we explore the implications of this bold move by Meta
TYVM, I’ve got some reading to do lol
Yeah, the widely practiced “Prosperity Gospel” stuff is like a religious studies PhD designed the most anti-Christian form of Christianity for a thesis, and suddenly people started picking it up and running with it.
First, it is by no means “widely practiced” as it is a niche version of Calvinism that is only common in the USA. The Roman Catholic church does not in any way endorse this view and they are a billion or so of the christian population. Whatever the Vatican does is more or less what is “widely practiced”.
Second as mentioned it is based in Calvinism. If I could slap the shit out of any man in history he’s in my top two.
Ohhh, friendo, there’s about 500 million Christians in Africa that are heavily besieged by Evangelicals pushing this for the political clout. It’s rampant.
Plus, that Joel Osteen guy peddled a version of this hard.
Who’s the other guy?
it is a niche version of Calvinism that is only common in the USA
Due to their fondness for finding new suckers, it’s now common in much of the Christian world, especially Mexico, Central America, Korea and some parts of Africa. Also, the source population for the spread of this contagion to the New World, the Protestants in Northern Ireland, have maintained relations with US fundies and many have adopted broadly similar beliefs.
If I could slap the shit out of any man in history he’s in my top two.
Likewise. It’s amazing how much Calivin’s followers, when in power, ruled just like the Taliban. He was a power-mad bloodless berk full of hatred for life.
like a religious studies PhD designed the most anti-Christian form of Christianity
More like some semi-literate huckster looking for a fatter income stream than he was getting from his holy-roller flock of rubes.
So no empathy for Elon Musk and his crybaby butthurt feelings? Fine by me!
Hearing voices from people that aren’t real is a pretty serious mental condition. I’m convinced religion and all the evil committed on its behalf all just trace back to the root of shit mental healthcare.
On a similar note, the old testament had a historical purpose - to unite disparate tribes and create a national identity against the threat posed by the Assyrian and Babylonian Empires.
The new testament is just a collections of writings and letters. We have no idea who wrote them, they lied on the cover saying the texts are written by the apostles. And by a pretty arbitrary process, a bunch of priests picked their favorite writings and made them into a cannon.
If the same thing happened today, nobody would believe them outside maybe a fringe cult.
PRIESTS made a cannon out of BOOKS‽ That’s some Warhammer shit.
Seriously though, it’s canon.
Not according to my head-cannon.
Easy there, Tankmon
Perhaps partly, my personal belief is the is traces back to early tribal days. I believe the first cultural leaders likely struggled with retaining control and authority at a certain point. After all, there is only so much you can threaten people with to keep them in like. The worse of which is death. A sufficiently motivated person may not care about their physical well-being if they want to achieve a important enough goal. Create an invisible “soul” and a space wizard that determines if that soul gets bliss or torture after death and it adds a new level of control.
Problem with that hypothesis is that pre modern people treated death very differently with in many places it was quite literal and physical, for example in ancient Germanic societies they thought of the underworld as someplace only the dead could travel to as in the actual corpses went to the underworld at night and returned to their grave during the day. Hell we can even see the ideas of the soul being refined during the Hellenic period with most philosophers settling on it being an “animating force” which is vague but about right with the ancient Greeks. The idea of the soul is probably relatively recent IE middle stone age at the earliest, and probably evolved out of far more ancient animistic traditions.
The problem is, from what I’ve heard, the black plauge killed all the good priests. Since they were the ones to go and read a person’s last will and testament, they would also end up catching the plauge a lot of the time. So eventually all the smart and respectable priests died, leaving them desperate for anyone. So from then the churches have been lead by undesirable
That sounds like blaming nature for human maliciousness.
What? Priests before the plauge were the ones who could read and write, and were chosen to be good carriers of the message. And those people, thinking they were doing the right thing by helping the dying go to heaven, caught the disease which wasn’t known as the black plauge yet.
They were wiped out almost immediately because of it. The churches then went to the second options, which followed soon after. It kept going until the churches were desperate for anyone to go a say the last rites.
So yeah then malicious people ended up taking over, but nature definitely caused the change.
Malicious people infiltrate structures with strong authority all the time. They just need time to work their way up, not a plague.
It is funny that you think shitty priests were just hanging in the wings as second stringers.
It is funny how I said the second stringers died soon after the first and you just completely disregarded that
The churches then went to the second options, which followed soon after. It kept going until the churches were desperate for anyone to go a say the last rites.
Your point is correct, no church was infallible before the plauge happened. I’m just stating the plauge made it exponentially easier for infiltration to occur as those opposing it were literally dying trying to be good people.
*plague
15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them.
Republicans would be very upset with you using the bible against them, if they had ever read the bible to know what it said.
The usual response is “you only know a few cherry picked quotes, and would burst into flames if you actually read the whole thing” blah blah blah.
The next usual response is “Oh, I appreciate the warning from when you gave it a go.”
I get so tired of faith being used to hurt.
I could say “I read it all years ago, have you?”. Grew up in an evangelical church that encouraged us to read it surprisingly.
**But if God intended that the Negro race should be Segregated in Africa then why did He curse the children of Ham and decree that they should be the servants, or slaves, ot the other races?’’
God did not. Canaan was the only one specifically cursed to be a ‘‘servant of servants’’ (Genesis 9:20-27). Even if we admit the possibility that all his descendants were included in the curse (the best Bible scholars disagree on this point). we must still remember that Canaan was only one of the four sons of Ham and therefore he fathered only a MINORITY of the black race. And as I said before, even that servile minority were to live in a different part of the country from the Hebrews (Genesis 10:19).
It cannot be positively proven from the Scriptures that the Negroes were cursed to be black because of Nimrod’s rebellion or because of Ham’s sexual laxity at the time of his father Noah’s drunkenness. But there are some verses that seem to leave that implication. For example in Jeremiah 13:23 we read, ‘*Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard his spots? then may ye also do good, that are accustomed to do evil.’’ Here the black Skin of the Negro is obviously a symbol of evil. This verse also shows that God meant for that skin to STAY BLACK and not be blended into a Thousand shades of mulatto.
The notion that the Negroes of this country have INHERITED the “‘deep Sunburn’’ that their forefathers are said to have suffered in Africa is ridiculous. Sunburns are not inherited, no matter how deeply they penetrate, not even by the first generation, not to mention the tenth or twelfth generation.
If we are to reject the curse of Ham and the rebellious leadership of Nimrod as explanations of why God made the‘Negro black then there is only one other possible explanation to be found anywhere in the Bible or out of it: THE GOOD LORD WAS SO ANXIOUS FOR THE HAMITES TO BE SEPARATED AND SEG- REGATED PEOPLE THAT HE MADE THEM RADICALLY DIFFERENT IN THEIR APPEARANCE FROM THE PEOPLE OF ALL OTHER RACES. He made their skin color different for for the same reason that He made their language different and for the same reason that He assigned them a different habitation… At least we would be much kinder and more charitable to our colored friends if we gave that explanation.
The southern Bible doesn’t read like yours and mine does, they made some notes in the margins.
interesting read, thanks!
With flattery he will corrupt those who have violated the covenant, but the people who know their God will firmly resist him.
Daniel 11:32
He will cause deceit to prosper, and he will consider himself superior… He will use every kind of evil deception to fool those on their way to destruction, because they refuse to love and accept the truth that would save them.
Daniel 8:25, 2 Thess 2:10
… a despicable person will arise… a man of contempt… to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred. He will slip in when least expected and will seize the kingdom through flattery and intrigue.
Daniel 11:21
After an alliance is made with him he will practice deception, and he will go up and gain power with a small force of people.
He will try to change the set times and the laws.
Dan. 7:25
Daniel 8 and 11 here are talking about a prophecy that has already “been fulfilled” - common in the Bible to make these kinds of retroactive prophecies. The bad guy being described there is Antiochus.
That is just Daniel 8. Daniel 11 could reasonably be talking about modern times
Could literally be talking about billions of people from a period spanning thousands of years.
Which is why some people still hold it up as a valuable text. It’s a well written book of scams to keep the ignorant masses in line.
It is, in essence, a compilation of the vague shite that “fortune tellers” spew to the marks looking to be told what they want to hear.
Not really, from context pretty sure it’s one of those “ex post facto” prophecy things.
This is why people should read books of the Bible and not verse. Random bits out of context are used to imply so much BS.
Now then, I tell you the truth: Three more kings will arise in Persia, and then a fourth, who will be far richer than all the others. When he has gained power by his wealth, he will stir up everyone against the kingdom of Greece. Then a mighty king will arise, who will rule with great power and do as he pleases. After he has arisen, his empire will be broken up and parceled out toward the four winds of heaven. It will not go to his descendants, nor will it have the power he exercised, because his empire will be uprooted and given to others.
The king of the South will become strong, but one of his commanders will become even stronger than he and will rule his own kingdom with great power. After some years, they will become allies. The daughter of the king of the South will go to the king of the North to make an alliance, but she will not retain her power, and he and his power will not last. In those days she will be betrayed, together with her royal escort and her father[ and the one who supported her.
One from her family line will arise to take her place. He will attack the forces of the king of the North and enter his fortress; he will fight against them and be victorious. He will also seize their gods, their metal images and their valuable articles of silver and gold and carry them off to Egypt. For some years he will leave the king of the North alone. Then the king of the North will invade the realm of the king of the South but will retreat to his own country. His sons will prepare for war and assemble a great army, which will sweep on like an irresistible flood and carry the battle as far as his fortress.
None of this is connected to Revelation, which was written centuries later.
I feel like there’s a single word to sum up one who’s teachings are directly opposed to those of Jesus 🤔
“See, if I put my arm through the sling here and reach down a little, all you have to do is shrug your shoulder. I call it the reverse Dutch rudder.”
“Then get thee behind me, Satan, but don’t stop that reacharound!”
“Unh, ugggh, oh my me! The second coming is at hand!”
This isn’t really new though, it’s just saying the quite part out loud. always-has-been.gif.
Neoliberalism is the cause of the decay and paved the way for fascism. If you let large conglomerates own everything including news media and social media and then sell access to spew vile hate speech and disinformation to people, the current result is to be expected. It’s actually kind of refreshing that they actually come out and say it.
These people also don’t believe in equality, they believe inequality of humans is fundamentally morally correct. Neoliberals believe in inequality based on class/wealth, fascists believe in inequality based on identity like race or gender.
The true sin is ignorance and neglect.
